2 ms·

AI isn't a stand-alone panacea for this. We've done lost of studies with other radiologists. Taking the union of two "bad" radiologists outperforms a single "go

AI isn't a stand-alone panacea for this. We've done lost of studies with other radiologists. Taking the union of two "bad" radiologists outperforms a single "good" radiologist. Humans aren't machines, we have bad days. I think the long term benefit of this kind of AI is as an audit AFTER the radiologist has done their assessment. If there is a mismatch, it should trigger a follow-up with a different a radiologist (without telling them the result of the 1st or the AI) to build consensus.

ajmurmann 5y ago
This! I wish we did this type of usage a lot more in a variety of areas. I previously proposed this at a job to enhance filtering out of false-positive security scan results. I think it doesn't get used because it would increase the immediate cost, not reduce it.
- tsjq 5y ago
  >I think it doesn't get used because it would increase the immediate cost, not reduce it. indeed that is the problem in many areas. Almost always mgmt looks with "tech = fewer human = instant cost savings" expectations. and anything that increases cost in the short term are shot down. sad . all blame on the cost-center vs profit-center mindset.
spockz 5y ago
I think getting a second “opinion” is pretty standard for biopsies?
Aspos 5y ago
AI which is slightly less effective than a well-educated, well-trained, expensive radiologist is better than nothing. There are places in this world which could afford a $XXK x-ray machine, but don't have access to a good radiologist.
YossarianFrPrez 5y ago
I completely agree. In fact, one wonders if the biggest use of AI/ML in medicine will actually be in medical notes and record keeping -- voice transcriptions, medical scribing, and interpreting writing, free-form text into standard diagnostic categories.
divbzero 5y ago
Agreed! It’s easy to get sucked into the (intriguing) human vs. machine question and forget that the best solution is often both or some orthogonal improvement.

ajmurmann 5y ago

This! I wish we did this type of usage a lot more in a variety of areas. I previously proposed this at a job to enhance filtering out of false-positive security scan results. I think it doesn't get used because it would increase the immediate cost, not reduce it.

tsjq 5y ago
>I think it doesn't get used because it would increase the immediate cost, not reduce it. indeed that is the problem in many areas. Almost always mgmt looks with "tech = fewer human = instant cost savings" expectations. and anything that increases cost in the short term are shot down. sad . all blame on the cost-center vs profit-center mindset.

spockz 5y ago

I think getting a second “opinion” is pretty standard for biopsies?

Aspos 5y ago

AI which is slightly less effective than a well-educated, well-trained, expensive radiologist is better than nothing. There are places in this world which could afford a $XXK x-ray machine, but don't have access to a good radiologist.

YossarianFrPrez 5y ago

I completely agree. In fact, one wonders if the biggest use of AI/ML in medicine will actually be in medical notes and record keeping -- voice transcriptions, medical scribing, and interpreting writing, free-form text into standard diagnostic categories.

divbzero 5y ago

Agreed! It’s easy to get sucked into the (intriguing) human vs. machine question and forget that the best solution is often both or some orthogonal improvement.