3 ms·
Unfortunately, in medicine, there is evidence that just because a computer program is better then a Dr at diagnosing a patient is no guarantee it will be used.
by opo 4y ago
Unfortunately, in medicine, there is evidence that just because a computer program is better then a Dr at diagnosing a patient is no guarantee it will be used. The classic example here was the MYCIN expert system developed in the 1970s. MYCIN was shown to outperform infectious disease experts by 1979 in a blind testing:
>... Eight independent evaluators with special expertise in the management of meningitis compared MYCIN's choice of antimicrobials with the choices of nine human prescribers for ten test cases of meningitis. MYCIN received an acceptability rating of 65% by the evaluators; the corresponding ratings for acceptability of the regimen prescribed by the five faculty specialists ranged from 42.5% to 62.5%. The system never failed to cover a treatable pathogen while demonstrating efficiency in minimizing the number of antimicrobials prescribed.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/366606 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/36660...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycin
- cfu28 4y agoThere are a lot of examples of these "expert systems" in medicine that seem to do well in research, but fail in other ways. We're seeing some of these failures again these days with ML models in medicine, especially bridging the gap between the proof-of-concept and production systems. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3666074 https://www.jstor.org/stable/3666074 https://aimi.stanford.edu/events/bridging-ais-proof-concept-production-gap-andrew-ng-phd https://aimi.stanford.edu/events/bridging-ais-proof-concept-...