51–60 of 141 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Last time I went to the doctor it was free. I just like to point out the small advantages of living in Europe now and again
I'm not sure you understand the definition of free.
That is my definition of free
> This allows doctors to be fully focused on their consultation Here's the thing: rigorous medical documentation is not a burden on the practitioner, but rather an integral part of treating someone. You need detailed historical data to diagnose some tricky conditions and treat them correctly. What's the tool doing to prevent a practitioner from simply blindly copy-pasting the output without verifying it? > and saves…
My worry is verification of facts. What if the model summarized incorrect facts, and it gets added to the medical history? How can doctors easily verify and fix things?
Last time I went to the doctor, he charged me $300 to google symptoms on a computer. Now you're saying I get to pay $300 for him to ask ChatGPT? No thanks. We all know that is where this is going - doctor decision support system, i.e. the AI has access to information locked behind expensive journals that the patient does not.
Last time I asked a developer to fix a bug, he charged me $300 to google the api docs..! But this isn't even about the doctor asking GPT, this is transcribing the video call so the journaling becomes easier and the doctor can spend more time with their patients. A good thing, no?
Pharmacists in other countries do a lot of the basic shit doctors in the USA do, with less overhead, for cheaper and with a much faster turnaround. Antibiotics, blood pressure/cholesterol meds, antidepressants and other rubber stamp drugs absolutely do not need to be strongly controlled.
Side-note: your email field to sign up for your newsletter is very wonky with both Safari and Firefox (at least for me). It only lets me type one letter at a time, for some reason.
Last time I went to the doctor, he charged me $300 to google symptoms on a computer. Now you're saying I get to pay $300 for him to ask ChatGPT? No thanks. We all know that is where this is going - doctor decision support system, i.e. the AI has access to information locked behind expensive journals that the patient does not.
If my doctor is googling he is doing his job. He has medical knowledge which allows him to sort through information. Any developer who doesn't google today is hindering his ability to develop and slowing the development process. Just like the dev cannot hold all the algorithms and language caveats/syntax in his head, a physician cannot hold all the information in his brain. He may not be familiar with symptoms or mig…
I think the general idea is interesting but this is the wrong benchmark to convince people imo. What is the actual error rate of Google's Speech-to-Text on this your data? How convinced are you that it's properly labeled? That it's 3x lower isn't necessarily impressive. Then a follow up question... What I as a patient would want to know is something else, how does it compare against medical secretaries that usually transcribe documents like these?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are so many regulations and certifications to do that there are no chances anyone will have money and time to do all paperwork to host it on-perm. Because of these regulatory reasons most hospitals use so old systems that it surprises no one to see Windows XP with IE6 there. I had the pleasure myself of fixing a Material Angular bug that wasn't displaying form fields validation correctly in IE6 only 2 years ago…
Off prem is also a rats nest of regulations.