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

Google Is Training Machines to Predict When a Patient Will Die

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 87 posts

Re: Google Is Training Machines to Predict When a Patient Will Die

#31

Post by carlmr »

Angostura wrote: post #9
amelius wrote: post #2

> Google’s system even showed which records led it to conclusions. What if the system points out that the particular doctors which appear in the records are the culprit?

Uncomfortable, but over all a good thing as long as the system uses this information properly; offering doctors additional supportive training, if appropriate. (And not forgetting that the doctors with the the worst recovery rates may be the ones predisposed to take the trickiest cases).

>(And not forgetting that the doctors with the the worst recovery rates may be the ones predisposed to take the trickiest cases).

IIRC there are a lot of surgeons not taking on cases already because of the risk involved to their career. This might exacerbate it if the data is used blindly.

Re: Google Is Training Machines to Predict When a Patient Will Die

#32

Post by ukj »

waydowntogo wrote: post #19

I'm programmer and I'm always saying (something like this) - the program / AI can be able to do things the best way how it can be done the best way by its programmer(s) My point is - this is completely nonsense. IT world and Real world are two difference worlds. It's look like Google needs wake up call.

Which is why positive AND negative feedback loops from your users/customers/ are vital to building great software.

Re: Google Is Training Machines to Predict When a Patient Will Die

#33

Post by louden »

digitalzombie wrote: post #12

Why did they just use a logistic model instead of survival/time-to-event model? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21478775 Uses cox regression model which is a survival regression model. Also the base model aka previous model they're comparing it to is a logistic regression and the link leads to a pdf about how to increase hospital efficiency it seems like. This sounds stupid and heartless. In statistic we got surv…

> It's great but with healthcare I don't think people should be treated as dollar signs.

These kinds of models are also great for triage. Healthcare is a limited resource, especially in trauma situations which have been using models to measure survival for decades.

Re: Google Is Training Machines to Predict When a Patient Will Die

#34

Post by segmondy »

aaavl2821 wrote: post #28

This was a year ago so things may have changed, but a senior exec at one of the nations largest health systems told me they were looking to change their end of life care program and looked at dozens of AIs that predicted when patients would die. None of them came close to just asking doctors which patients they thought would die within 12-18 months The point of the project was to make end of life easier for patients…

Pretty much it comes down to profit.

Re: Google Is Training Machines to Predict When a Patient Will Die

#36

Post by himom »

itschekkers wrote: post #25

I hate to pour cold water on this, but medical researchers have been predicting mortality for years. For example, here's a paper from the 1980's also predicting when a patient will die, also using a couple of thousands of patients' data: http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/3816253 And, Google's paper wasn't published in Nature, it was in a new open access journal owned by Nature. In academia, that is like the differenc…

Regardless of medical / health insurance purposes, actuaries have been doing this for over a century esp. to price life insurance, among other things.

Re: Google Is Training Machines to Predict When a Patient Will Die

#37

Post by [deleted] »

dragonwriter wrote: post #16
dapearce wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Customer A does not receive full medical support because "he's dying anyway"? Unless the patient consents to stop or reduce care, this would be medical negligence, which is illegal (in the US). Medical providers are required by law to provide medical treatment with all the knowledge and skill they possess.

> Medical providers are required by law to provide medical treatment with all the knowledge and skill they possess. No, to avoid liability for malpractice, they need to meet the “professional standard of care”, which is assessed by general practice in the medical community, not “all the knowledge and skill” the individual provider possesses.

[deleted]

Re: Google Is Training Machines to Predict When a Patient Will Die

#39

Post by Broken_Hippo »

dapearce wrote: post #14
jand wrote: post #4

I would feel quite unconfortable if every action taken (or not taken) by medic staff has to be second-guessed simply because there are financial incentives derived from this research. Customer A does not receive full medical support because "he's dying anyway"? Is there a way to ensure that such cruel use of the research is prohibited?

>Customer A does not receive full medical support because "he's dying anyway"? Unless the patient consents to stop or reduce care, this would be medical negligence, which is illegal (in the US). Medical providers are required by law to provide medical treatment with all the knowledge and skill they possess.

I wish that were the case. They'll treat you in the ER, but not make sure you can actually purchase antibiotics to cure the thing that brought you to the ER to begin with, nor make sure you can afford the bone specialist you need to see for your surgery.

Anything short of an emergency and you can be denied care due to finances. Even if your problem is cancer or they know it will eventually be an emergency or life-threatening. Money is part of the reason folks will use the emergency room instead of urgent care: Urgent care requires upfront payment, the emergency room does not. Many doctors will refuse to see someone if they do not pay upfront.

Luckily, different agencies tend to step in with end of life care.

Re: Google Is Training Machines to Predict When a Patient Will Die

#40

Post by joshgel »

chii wrote: post #29
joshgel wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is partially true. Her data can't be used willy nilly (sp?). Hospitals and doctors offices can use this data for their internal operations, to improve efficiency, quality, etc and (honestly) profit. They can also use this data in research, but only with IRB approval for exemption from consent. Her data should be protected! Also, I would add that the data collected for routine patient care is often of significant…

> Her data should be protected! but if it could be anonymized (i.e., the medical data such as blood tests, history of diseases etc disassociated with any names), then wouldn't it make sense to have this data be used for research?

Definitely, still should require IRB approval and careful study design, limited access to only those who need it, etc
Post reply on HN