Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

worksinprogress.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 486 posts

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#441

Post by seesthruya »

mettamage wrote: post #236
aabajian wrote: post #209

I'm an interventional radiologist with a master's in computer science. People outside radiology don't get why AI hasn't taken over. Can AI read diagnostic images better than a radiologist? Almost certainly the answer is (or will be) yes. Will radiologists be replaced? Almost certainly the answer is no. Why not? Medical risk. Unless the law changes, a radiologist will have to sign off on each imaging report. So say yo…

So you studied like 8 years of med school [1] and 2 years of CS? Damn! That’s a lot. [1] I don’t know the US system so it’s just a guess

Me:

4 years undergrad - major and minor not important, met the pre-med requirements 2 year grad school (got a master's degree, not required, but I was having fun) 4 years medical school 5 years radiology residency

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#442

Post by seesthruya »

donnfelker wrote: post #15

Oh yes it is. I have worked on projects where highly trained specialized doctors have helped train the models (or trained them themselves) to catch random very difficult to notice conditions via radiology. Some of these systems are deployed at different hospitals and medical facilities around the country. The radiologist still does there job, but some odd, random hard to notice conditions, AI is a literal life saver.…

> Some of these systems are deployed at different hospitals and medical facilities around the country. The radiologist still does there job, but some odd, random hard to notice conditions, AI is a literal life saver

I would be very interested if you could provide specific examples.

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#443

Post by borroka »

aabajian wrote: post #209

I'm an interventional radiologist with a master's in computer science. People outside radiology don't get why AI hasn't taken over. Can AI read diagnostic images better than a radiologist? Almost certainly the answer is (or will be) yes. Will radiologists be replaced? Almost certainly the answer is no. Why not? Medical risk. Unless the law changes, a radiologist will have to sign off on each imaging report. So say yo…

However, it is also because, in matters of life or death, as a diagnosis from a radiologist can be, we often seek a second opinion, perhaps even a third.

But we don't ask a second opinion to an "algorithm", we want a person, in front of us, telling us what is going on.

AI is and will be used in the foreseeable future as a tool by radiologists, but radiologists, at least for some more years, will keep their jobs.

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#444

Post by borroka »

rogerrogerr wrote: post #289
CSSer wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious how many people would want a second opinion (from a human) if they're presented with a bad discovery from a radiological exam and are then told it was fully automated. I have to admit if my life were on the line I might be that Karen.

A bad discovery probably means your exam will be read by someone qualified, like the surgeon/doctor tasked with correcting it. False negatives are far more problematic.

But since we don't know where those false negatives are, we want radiologists.

I remember a funny question that my non-technical colleagues asked me during the presentation of some ML predictions. They asked me, “How wrong is this prediction?” And I replied that if I knew, I would have made the prediction correct. Errors are estimated on a test data set, either overall or broken down by groups.

The technological advances have supported medical professionals so far, but not substituted them: they have allowed medical professionals to do more and better.

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#445

Post by FireBeyond »

KnuthIsGod wrote: post #353

I sent a lady today to a radiologist for a core biopsy of a likely malignancy. And a man to a radiologist for a lumbar perineural injection. And a person to a radiologist for a subacromial bursa injection. And a month ago I sent a woman to a radiologist to have adenomyosis embolised. Also talked to a patient today who I will probably send to a radiologist to have a postnephrectomy urinary leak embolised. Is an LLM go…

> Due to automated ECG interpretation built into every machine

Oof - I hope the tools you're using as a physician are better than in the field as a paramedic.

I have never met a Lifepak (or Zoll) that doesn't interpret anything but the most textbook sinus rhythm in pristine conditions as "ABNORMAL ECG - EVALUATION NEEDED".

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#446

Post by otterley »

UltraSane wrote: post #305
kbos87 wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is like saying that self-driving cars won't ever become a thing because someone behind the wheel needs to be to blame. The article cites AI systems that the FDA already has cleared to operate without a physicians' validation.

Tesla still hasn't accepted liability for crashes caused by FSD. They in fact fight any such claims in court very vigorously.

They have settled out of court in every single case. None has gone to trial. This suggests that the company is afraid not only of the amount of damages that could be awarded by a jury, but also legal precedent that holds them or other manufacturers liable for injuries caused by FSD failures.

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#447

Post by chromatin »

hnfong wrote: post #399
chromatin wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The belief is -- and it is one that I share -- that this makes for more well rounded, human physicians. Additionally, a greater depth of thinking leads to better diagnosticians, and physician-scientists as well (IMO). Now, all of this is predicated on the traditional model of the University education, not the glorified jobs training program that it has slowly become.

Cynically, it's also a way for the US system to gatekeep "poor" people from entering professions like medicine and law because of the extra tuition fees (and opportunity time-cost) needed to complete their studies.

I am a natural skeptic, but in this case I think it is just an accident of history how different systems developed.

FWIW, although this is not well known, many medical schools offer combined BA/MD degrees, ranging from 4-8 years:

https://students-residents.aamc.org/medical-school-admission...

When I went 20 years ago, my school did not require a bachelor's degree and would admit exceptional students after 2 years of undergraduate coursework. However I think this has now gone away everywhere due to AAMC criteria

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#448

Post by FireBeyond »

roncesvalles wrote: post #332
sarchertech wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My wife is an ER doctor. I asked her and she said she talks to the radiologists all the time. I also recently had surgery and the surgeon talked to the radiologist to discuss my MRI before operating.

I'd clarify if her "all the time" means a couple of times a week. For 99.9% of cases an ER doctor would just read what the radiologist wrote in the document. It's sort of like saying "sometimes a cab driver talks to passengers and suggests a nice restaurant nearby, so you can't automate it away with a self-driving cab."

Not an ER physician, but as a paramedic that spent a lot of time in the ER, it depends. Code 3 trauma/medical calls would generally have portable XR brought to the ER room, waiting for our arrival with the patient. In those cases, the XR is taken in the room, not in the DI (diagnostic imaging) wing, and generally the interaction flow will be "XR sent by wifi to radiologist elsewhere, who will then call the ER room and review the imaging live, or very quickly thereafter (i.e. minutes)", because of the emergent need, versus waiting for report dictation/transcription.

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#449

Post by stavros »

aabajian wrote: post #209

I'm an interventional radiologist with a master's in computer science. People outside radiology don't get why AI hasn't taken over. Can AI read diagnostic images better than a radiologist? Almost certainly the answer is (or will be) yes. Will radiologists be replaced? Almost certainly the answer is no. Why not? Medical risk. Unless the law changes, a radiologist will have to sign off on each imaging report. So say yo…

I'm not going to comment on whether AI is better than human radiologists or not, but if it is, what will happen is this:

Radiologists will validate the results but either find themselves clicking "approve, approve, approve" all day, or disagree and find they were wrong (since our hypothesis is that the AI is better than a human). Eventually, this will be common knowledge in the field, hospitals will decide to save on costs and just skip the humans altogether, lobby, and get the law changed.

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#450

Post by DarkNova6 »

robotresearcher wrote: post #280
DarkNova6 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about optimism. It is well established in the industry that Tesla's hardware-stack gives them 98% accuracy at the very most. But those voices are drowned by the marketing bravado. In the case of Musk it has worked out. His lies have earned him a fortune and now he asks Tesla to pay him out with a casual 1 trillion paycheck.

What does ‘accuracy’ mean here?

To correctly assess the state of the world. Since Tesla exclusively uses visual sensors, they are massively limited in how accurate it can ever be… or safe.

But hey, costs are lower that way.

Post reply on HN