3 ms·
Well, imagine a doctor having a suspicion of some kind, sending a patient to get scanned and an AI ignoring an anomaly and substituting it with an interpolation
by gdy 8y ago
Well, imagine a doctor having a suspicion of some kind, sending a patient to get scanned and an AI ignoring an anomaly and substituting it with an interpolation of normal tissue. The doctor looks at the result and thinks he might have been wrong and says to the patient that he is fine.
Even if it happens more rarely than a doctor missing an anomaly on the scan, it doesn't feel right. A patient had a good chance to be diagnosed and he wasn't.
What's more, in case of normal MRI a patient or a doctor can ask another doctor to have a look, but in case of AI and the fast scan described in the article, the AI's interpretation of data is final, unless you go make another scan, this time in the traditional way.
- FeepingCreature 8y agoI think this is more a problem with your feeling than the actual process. You're focusing on the person who got falsely detected as healthy, and are ignoring the people who would be correctly detected as unhealthy. That's why the important question is expected outcomes. I don't really care whether the doctor gets to be morally culpable or not. I'm not sure why I would ever care about something like that as a patient. If I get sick and die, the fact that a person was responsible rather than an algorithm gives me precisely zero comfort.
- gdy 8y agoYou falsely believe that it is a binary choice. Cost-cutting allowed by this fast and creative scanning is not the only way to help more patients.