3 ms·
Well, it's a good point but how do you decide what's critical? To answer my own question; I believe the future lies in machine learning algorithms processing s
by bobowzki 10y ago
Well, it's a good point but how do you decide what's critical?
To answer my own question; I believe the future lies in machine learning algorithms processing symptoms and tests (I guess a symptom is also a test in the sense that it's the answer to a question).
Most of the times there's also not a simple answer to be found . The right answer depends on many factors including the capabilities of your hospital/country/economy and the state of science.
- petra 10y ago>> I believe the future lies in machine learning algorithms processing symptoms and tests At the core you're still left with the question - tell your patient directly results of a statistical analysis of a few possibilities and options - and often see him take the wrong one, or guide him through trust(in you or the machine) while not showing him full details. Right ?
- paviva 10y ago> The right answer depends on many factors including the capabilities of your hospital [...] Absolutely ! I'll add that the physician himself is a kind of test, in the sense that his own sensitivity/specificity to diagnosing a disease can be calculated. It is well known -- and I'a argue it's a feature, not a bug --, that the exact same patients with the exact same symptoms will have a different work-up whether he's seen a GP, an emergency physician, or, say a heart surgeon. The reason is pretty simple: because disease prevalence is different in those three practices, the doctor has to order more or less tests to get the same predictive power. E.g., when every patient has heart disease, every ECG change is probably sign of disease, whereas when almost nobody has any heart problems, ECGs are pretty meaningless.