Monday, December 15, 2014

How computers/AI could replace your doctor

How computers will replace your doctor - The Week

this [General Practitioner] profession is going the way of the dodo bird. To understand why, the first thing you need to understand is that multiple studies have shown that software is better able to diagnose illnesses, with fewer misdiagnoses. Health wonks love this trend, known as evidence-based
diagnosis, and medical doctors loathe it, because who cares about saving lives when you can avoid the humiliation of having a computer tell you what to do.

Then you need to look at companies like Theranos, which allow you to get a blood test cheaply and easily at Walgreens, and get more information about your health than you'd get in a typical doctor's visit.

Then look at a company like Sherpaa, whose mobile app provides you diagnoses, helps you get your prescriptions filled, refers you to specialists, and so on. Right now, Sherpaa works with doctors. But there's no reason to think it couldn't eventually work with software (and in the meantime, work with cheaper Indian doctors rather than morbidly expensive American doctors).
But, you say, we won't be able to get rid of the human general practitioner absolutely. People will still need human judgment, and the human touch.
You are right — absolutely right. But the human we need is someone with training closer to a nurse's than a doctor's, and augmented by the right software, would be both cheaper and more effective than a doctor. You might pay a monthly subscription to be able to treat this person as your family "doctor" — although most of your interaction would be with software via an app. They'd be better than a doctor, too — trained in general wellness and prevention, and being able to refer you to specialists if need be.
What room is there left for generalist doctors in that scenario? None. They're the ones who the internet will replace; and it is nurses and other "low-skilled" health workers who will do best out of this shift. And most importantly, it will be great for patients.

Can a Computer Replace Your Doctor? - NYTimes.com
AS a former physician, I shivered a bit when I heard Dr. Vivek Wadhwa say he would rather have an artificial-intelligence doctor than a human one. “I would trust an A.I. over a doctor any day,” he proclaimed at a recent health innovation conference in San Francisco, noting that artificial intelligence provided “perfect knowledge.” When asked to vote, probably a third of those in attendance agreed.
But it made sense: Dr. Wadhwa is a professor, entrepreneur and technology visionary. What’s more, the conference took place in San Francisco, where faith in the power of technology and data to solve problems holds unshakable sway.

AI gives better results at lower cost
The Computer That Could Replace Your Doctor | FDL Action


Can computers save health care? IU research shows lower costs, better outcomes: IU News Room: Indiana University
BLOOMINGTON, Ind. --
By using a new framework that employs sequential decision-making, the previous single-decision research can be expanded into models that simulate numerous alternative treatment paths out into the future; maintain beliefs about patient health status over time even when measurements are unavailable or uncertain; and continually plan/re-plan as new information becomes available. In other words, it can "think like a doctor."
"The Markov Decision Processes and Dynamic Decision Networks enable the system to deliberate about the future, considering all the different possible sequences of actions and effects in advance, even in cases where we are unsure of the effects," Bennett said.
Moreover, the approach is non-disease-specific -- it could work for any diagnosis or disorder, simply by plugging in the relevant information.
The new work addresses three vexing issues related to health care in the U.S.: rising costs expected to reach 30 percent of the gross domestic product by 2050; a quality of care where patients receive correct diagnosis and treatment less than half the time on a first visit; and a lag time of 13 to 17 years between research and practice in clinical care.

No comments: