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

I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

antoine.fi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 748 posts

Re: I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

#351

Post by girvo »

something98 wrote: post #154
rvnx wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Human doctors use LLMs to diagnose too OpenEvidence claims "More than 40% of U.S. physicians use it daily, and it handled around 20 million clinical consultations per month. Over 100 million Americans were treated by a doctor using it in 2025." https://www.cnbc.com/2026/01/21/openevidence-chatgpt-for-doc...

This is a very misleading statement; most of those physicians are using LLMs to transcribe notes from visits and/or for billing purposes (e.g., proper billing codes).

Which is itself a problem as (in my partners evaluations as an optometrist), LLMs used for clinical notes has a bad habit of dropping clinically important information, and the biggest providers don’t give you a copy of the raw transcript or a recording

Which means she ends up spending just as much time as if she’d done it herself as it needs to be verified for accuracy every time…

Re: I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

#352

Post by baxtr »

rafterydj wrote: post #15

I feel like I'm going nuts. There are other commenters saying this is a good practice they've also done for other injuries. You are saying you are an actual radiologist and immediately clock the problems with its advice. I have seen this pattern over and over again. Anytime someone is an actual expert at anything, AI output appears insufficient or incomplete or outright misleading. It is only when you do not know wha…

This is a serious issue for young people I think.

I have seen outputs that look good but the actual content is bad. If you’re inexperienced in a field you can’t see it because AI makes anything look right.

I have gotten very good results with AI but you can’t take the first answer at face value. You need to be suspicious and challenging until you tweak out the right answer over time.

Re: I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

#353

Post by operatingthetan »

FromTheFirstIn wrote: post #329
aspenmartin wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s strange to me, what would you define as learning?

To acquire new knowledge and build your understanding. They don’t understand so they can’t learn

Thank you for saying succinctly what I could not. If your consciousness and knowledge fundamentally does not change from your ongoing experience, then you are not learning. This is how the LLM currently functions.

Re: I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

#354

Post by azan_ »

kgeist wrote: post #341

A few years ago (before the AI craze), I was misdiagnosed with tuberculosis. I had a chronic cough, and an outsourced radiologist at a clinic found signs of tuberculosis. The findings were sent to the city's tuberculosis hospital, as required by the country's law. The doctors there took the radiologist's conclusion at face value and required me to stay at their hospital for at least 8 months under a strict, prison-li…

How is it possible? You can't diagnose tuberculosis just based on imaging and tuberculosis hospital has to know that!

Re: I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

#355

Post by nicksergeant »

pickleRick243 wrote: post #153
rasmus1610 wrote: post #116

As a radiologist I have found Claude and ChatGPT to be absolutely terrible at MRI and I would not trust it one bit. It has its merits if you need to research stuff that is more text based, but radiological images is just something that they cannot interpret good enough (yet)

It's like people who expect ChatGPT to be really good at chess because chess engines with super-human performance have been around for decades, so obviously the latest frontier LLM that took billions to train should find the task trivial. Actually, I'm curious what ChatGPT 5.5's ELO is- I wouldn't be too surprised if it's 2000+ just from its basic understanding of chess principles from all the content it has digested…

Interestingly LLMs are extremely bad at chess position _images_. I have to imagine if you give it positions in text it'd be pretty great but when I was learning chess and pasting images of positions in for analysis I couldn't believe how wrong it was. I actually thought it was looking at the board in reverse but even when pointing out problems it seemed completely incapable of understanding what it was missing (of course... it doesn't really "understand" anything).

LLMs truly are marvels with text but anything spatial seems to really mess it up, somehow.

Re: I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

#356

Post by charles_f »

piterrro wrote: post #295

It funny to see the community here expects the human body to be treated like a deterministic function: for input X expect output Y - and that transfers to diagnosis - people expect to receive the same diagnosis from different specialists for the same issue. Given human body complexity, the diagnosis is a compound output of the experience, knowledge gained throughout the career and diagnosis methods/equipment, the tit…

> It funny to see the community here expects the human body to be treated like a deterministic function

In a community largely made of people whose job it is to produce such functions, I'd say it's to be expected

Re: I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

#357

Post by dang »

rafterydj wrote: post #15

I feel like I'm going nuts. There are other commenters saying this is a good practice they've also done for other injuries. You are saying you are an actual radiologist and immediately clock the problems with its advice. I have seen this pattern over and over again. Anytime someone is an actual expert at anything, AI output appears insufficient or incomplete or outright misleading. It is only when you do not know wha…

(We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48709121.)

Re: I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

#358

Post by Shitty-kitty »

chmod775 wrote: post #248
brokencode wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I seriously doubt that data set poisoning will be a real limiter in model performance. For one, if your website/book is poisoned, who is going to trust it for anything at all, much less for training models? For two, all the major AI labs hire or contract for subject matter experts to create curated data sets, evaluate model performance, etc. Unless they hire malicious experts, this will provide a growing, high qualit…

There's a post every other month where some dude who put nonsense information online celebrates because it actually ended up in some frontier models weights. If it's easy enough that some randos can do it for fun, what do you think happens when there's commercial interest behind it? Obviously companies are going try nudging AI towards recommending whatever they're selling. It's a logical extension of SEO - and that's…

They already are, It has become a real problem in Reddit. Especially with the latest in pseudo-science crap like peptides.

Re: I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

#360

Post by Paracompact »

ambicapter wrote: post #227
sxg wrote: post #6

I'm a radiologist but can't really weigh in without seeing the full 3D MRI dataset. Regarding this point: > They performed shockwave therapy on my shoulder even though a recent clinical practice guideline says clinicians should not use or recommend shockwave therapy for rotator-cuff tendinopathy without calcification; I was told during ultrasound that there was no calcification. Ultrasound isn't a great way to assess…

> So an ultrasound report can state there are no calcifications while a plain radiograph can report the presence of calcifications without being inconsistent. Obviously very confusing to patients and people unfamiliar with medical jargon This is being overly nice, I think. Anyone who doesn't understand this is an idiot imo. You would have to assume that every type of diagnosis instrument has infinite clarity and is a…

"On two occasions I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question."
Post reply on HN