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

Stanford apologizes after vaccine allocation leaves out medical residents

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 251 posts

Re: Stanford apologizes after vaccine allocation leaves out medical residents

#31

Post by root_axis »

fairity wrote: post #18

> According to an email sent by a chief resident to other residents, Stanford's leaders explained that an algorithm was used to assign its first allotment of the vaccine. The algorithm was said to have prioritized those health care workers at highest risk for COVID infections, along with factors like age and the location or unit where they work in the hospital. Residents apparently did not have an assigned location,…

The outrage stems from the fact that they doubled down on it after the problem was pointed out, this is what caused things to escalate to the level it did, which became a PR nightmare and resulted in them reversing their position. Heads should roll over this, not because there was a mistake in the algorithm, but because the leadership cannot be trusted to make correct decisions in the face of obvious errors.

Re: Stanford apologizes after vaccine allocation leaves out medical residents

#32

Post by 1-6 »

I’ve been tracking the news and the priority of administering the vaccine has been a debate in itself. If ML can truly find out the obvious and identify key areas to target, we can avoid a bunch of unnecessary finger pointing. What may seem obvious to humans may be totally wrong.

Re: Stanford apologizes after vaccine allocation leaves out medical residents

#33

Post by davidf560 »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #22
jerry80 wrote: post #4

Why is Stanford in a position to choose allocations in the first place? I thought the government was going to handle allocations.

The federal government has allocated to states, and pretty much left it up to the states how to allocate internally. With some vague sort of guidelines. Most states seem to be deciding to prioritize healthcare workers (especially those taking care of covid patients) either entirely or among other groups. So the way you do that is delivering to hospitals makes sense. CA presumably allocated a certain amount to Stanfor…

> It is ridiculous there aren't much more clear/specific guidelines, and in some cases enforceable policies/regulations, from the federal government. It's like nobody's driving the bus here.

Why is this not California's fault? States were each permitted to establish their own procedures, which somewhat makes sense given the challenging distribution requirements of the Pfizer vaccine. Montana has significantly different challenges than Rhode Island in that sense. Most states that I know of have established clear guidelines saying who gets it and when - I assume California is the same.

Seems like California is the governmental entity that failed to exercise proper oversight and/or requirements specification here.

Re: Stanford apologizes after vaccine allocation leaves out medical residents

#34

Post by jrochkind1 »

fairity wrote: post #28
jrochkind1 wrote: post #15

> "[A]lgorithms are made by people and the results ... were reviewed multiple times by people," You got that right. The way they talk about "an algorithm did it" makes it seem as as if they think that somehow explains it, like there was only one algorithm possible handed down from god or something. We'll be seeing more and more of this of course. "We can't be blamed, it was an algorithm! We can't be blamed for trusti…

I think most people are misunderstanding the likely root cause. > An algorithm was used to assign its first allotment of the vaccine. The algorithm prioritized health care workers at highest risk for COVID infections, along with factors like age and the location or unit where they work in the hospital. Residents did not have an assigned location, and along with their typically young age, they were dropped low on the…

I don't think I was assuming anything in particular about the intents.

it's a rather important thing not to check on actual data, including residents in the sample, isn't it? they just never bothered to test the algorithm, didn't even review the results it spit out, before delivering the results as a plan? (it is quite possible indeed they didn't, I'm not saying that is a coverup for some other motive, I'm saying that is incompetent). What was the QA process like? Who was involved in it? From the article, apparently not any department heads or medical staff in general.

That's not a competent design process for something so important, is it?

That they never bothered to see how "the algorithm" treated residents demonstrates that they didn't give a shit about residents, not necessarily that they were intentionally screwing them.

The administration doesn't say much about how the algorithm was designed, they just say "oh, it was an algorithm." I think many people believe that "algorithms are objective" and they are trying to play that.

Re: Stanford apologizes after vaccine allocation leaves out medical residents

#35

Post by davidf560 »

jtbayly wrote: post #11

Why should residents who are young and very low risk be a high priority? The answer is simple. They shouldn’t. This is absurd to complain about. Lots of other people should be higher priority. Edit: I’m not surprised at the downvotes, but I’m just laughing. It’s like everybody’s brain has turned to mush! How on earth do you expect them to prioritize these vaccines if not based on age and other risk factors?

> Why should residents who are young and very low risk be a high priority?

Maybe they shouldn't be top priority, but if they're dealing directly with covid patients they sure as heck should have higher priority than a VP or administrator that's been working from home this whole time.

Re: Stanford apologizes after vaccine allocation leaves out medical residents

#36

Post by root_axis »

jtbayly wrote: post #11

Why should residents who are young and very low risk be a high priority? The answer is simple. They shouldn’t. This is absurd to complain about. Lots of other people should be higher priority. Edit: I’m not surprised at the downvotes, but I’m just laughing. It’s like everybody’s brain has turned to mush! How on earth do you expect them to prioritize these vaccines if not based on age and other risk factors?

They are at high risk of infection because they are exposed to sick people as part of their job caring for the sick... how is that not obvious?

Re: Stanford apologizes after vaccine allocation leaves out medical residents

#37

Post by Rebelgecko »

Another messed up thing I've heard is that many hospitals are prioritizing vaccines for WFH Administrators over staff that are actually working at hospitals..

Its a weird system, I asked someone I know who is doing her residency how many times she's been COVID tested this year... just once. Apparently as long as you're not working on the COVID floor there isn't really a requirement at her hospital.

Re: Stanford apologizes after vaccine allocation leaves out medical residents

#38

Post by edoceo »

beamatronic wrote: post #29
jrochkind1 wrote: post #15

> "[A]lgorithms are made by people and the results ... were reviewed multiple times by people," You got that right. The way they talk about "an algorithm did it" makes it seem as as if they think that somehow explains it, like there was only one algorithm possible handed down from god or something. We'll be seeing more and more of this of course. "We can't be blamed, it was an algorithm! We can't be blamed for trusti…

Select * From employees sort by salary desc

This is the same algorithm many companies use for benefits programs

Re: Stanford apologizes after vaccine allocation leaves out medical residents

#39

Post by jrochkind1 »

davidf560 wrote: post #33
jrochkind1 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The federal government has allocated to states, and pretty much left it up to the states how to allocate internally. With some vague sort of guidelines. Most states seem to be deciding to prioritize healthcare workers (especially those taking care of covid patients) either entirely or among other groups. So the way you do that is delivering to hospitals makes sense. CA presumably allocated a certain amount to Stanfor…

> It is ridiculous there aren't much more clear/specific guidelines, and in some cases enforceable policies/regulations, from the federal government. It's like nobody's driving the bus here. Why is this not California's fault? States were each permitted to establish their own procedures, which somewhat makes sense given the challenging distribution requirements of the Pfizer vaccine. Montana has significantly differe…

At all levels, sure.

Most states you know have established clear guidelines sayign who gets it and when? Including specifics on what medical staff within a hospital system would get it? Like not just "health care staff" or "first responders" (everyone in the Stanford Medicine system is that already right, this is about who within that group gets it).

Please back that up by showing me such clear guidelines from a few states. It should be easy to find this, if indeed most states have done this, presumably in a very transparent way for something so important and contentious, right?

I don't believe most states have.

(It doesn't make it easier that the federal government told states how much they'd get them REDUCED it, and in general is only committing to telling states how much they'll get a week in advance).

Post reply on HN