> Interesting, but there is a lot of "intent" in writing notes and I am not convinced it could capture the full picture without significant human supervision. [

> Interesting, but there is a lot of "intent" in writing notes and I am not convinced it could capture the full picture without significant human supervision. [...] At least when I write, I know it's correct. To my understanding, notes would otherwise largely be written from memory after the visit - which adds a fairly significant opportunity for omissions and errors to sneak in. It seems plausible to me that by fixing that low-hanging fruit, this tool could potentially reach current human levels of accuracy overall even if it has shortcomings in other areas, like not being as good at non-shallow reasoning. Not to necessarily say it's currently at human-level. > Would it really save time writing paperwork if you have to go through it anyways and check if there's anything wrong? Five minutes saved per encounter, allegedly[0]. The decrease in clinician burnout and patient satisfaction also seem pretty significant. But, not sure how much Microsoft have massaged those figures. [0]: https://news.microsoft.com/?p=449586 https://news.microsoft.com/?p=449586