31–40 of 49 posts
Many are full of hot air and... actually, that's it. They're mostly hot air. Maybe they think their hot air smells a little different?
If the IPO markets don't open soon, and VC firms remain cautious for much longer, making it difficult for these companies to tap into a new supply of fresh air, which they urgently need to stay afloat, we'll see more of them dwindle to nothing.
Damn, I'm going to have to actually go to a doctor now.
The UK part at least has been taken over by eMed. Might well be much of it will be kept operational, sans the "AI triage" which to me never seemed like more than a basic decision tree.
I'd like a word for what is now the ritualized 'weirdo CEO anecdote' as a hook into why a company failed trope. Make no mistake: if Babylon were currently worth $20bn, Antigua standups and calling employees Babylonians would be the subject of business-school case studies. That said, this is a puff piece in Wired for so many reasons, not least of which is the question of whether or not app-based diagnosis and triage i…
But it'll be rare they'd be able to safely tell people they don't need an appointment, and I'd have to imagine it doesn't take many ANP appointments leading to a referral to a GP before their savings from referring to a nurse first disappears.
I'm sure it'll eventually pay off, but I'm not sure just how many appointments they can avoid that way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it was IBM that demonstrated in the 80s that a decision tree out performed doctors at diagnosis.
First line diagnosis is one of the hardest things we expect doctors to do. It's unlikely to fund a unicorn though, because it's also one of the least well paid activities for a doctor.
Obvious shunt the really urgent stuff off to A&E without talking to a doctor first, and nudge less serious things to an Advanced Nurse Practitioner, who would be cheaper for them.
But I imagine there's a tricky tradeoff there where every ANP consultation that leads to a referral back to a doctor because the ANP couldn't address the issue ends up costing them their savings from multiple ANP referrals.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it was IBM that demonstrated in the 80s that a decision tree out performed doctors at diagnosis.
Given what inputs? Doctors don’t seem to be very competent at diagnosing things without a bunch of very expensive tests for unrelated things first and even then it’s just weeding out what it isn’t rather than accurately predicting what disease a person has.
>... Eight independent evaluators with special expertise in the management of meningitis compared MYCIN's choice of antimicrobials with the choices of nine human prescribers for ten test cases of meningitis. MYCIN received an acceptability rating of 65% by the evaluators; the corresponding ratings for acceptability of the regimen prescribed by the five faculty specialists ranged from 42.5% to 62.5%. The system never failed to cover a treatable pathogen while demonstrating efficiency in minimizing the number of antimicrobials prescribed.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/36660...
I was hoping they were going to somehow draw parallels from ancient (Mesopotamian) Babylon. Sadly, it's some apparently overhyped health startup, which isn't nearly as interesting, although probably a more relevant comparison.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given what inputs? Doctors don’t seem to be very competent at diagnosing things without a bunch of very expensive tests for unrelated things first and even then it’s just weeding out what it isn’t rather than accurately predicting what disease a person has.
I don't know if IBM created anything in this area back then, but the MYCIN expert system was developed in the 1970s at Stanford. MYCIN was shown to outperform infectious disease experts by 1979 in a blind testing: >... Eight independent evaluators with special expertise in the management of meningitis compared MYCIN's choice of antimicrobials with the choices of nine human prescribers for ten test cases of meningitis…
I was hoping they were going to somehow draw parallels from ancient (Mesopotamian) Babylon. Sadly, it's some apparently overhyped health startup, which isn't nearly as interesting, although probably a more relevant comparison.
This is why I came here and was sorely disappointed.
I was hoping they were going to somehow draw parallels from ancient (Mesopotamian) Babylon. Sadly, it's some apparently overhyped health startup, which isn't nearly as interesting, although probably a more relevant comparison.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylon_Berlin
This show draws some parallels if that's what you seek.
The fact that that company even made it so far is quite of a mystery to me. The tech stack, the complete lack of understanding of how things worked in the real world, the occasional illiterate product manager, and many many other things made me quickly understand that it will go belly up in a couple of years. Fast forward to today and i was absolutely right.
It's such a shame. From a user point of view they were great. I'm registered with them. The UK GP practice has been taken over by someone else (eMed) The app was great. I got appointments fast until very recently. The triage was basic, though, but to an end-user it wouldn't have been obvious to what extent their business plan relied on that for the shot at future profitability. I used to work for a VC, and we investe…