7 ms·

This seems like a problem that should be worked on It also seems like we shouldn't let it prevent all AI deployment in the interim. It is better that we take t

by _bin_ 2y ago

This seems like a problem that should be worked on It also seems like we shouldn't let it prevent all AI deployment in the interim. It is better that we take the disease detection rate for part of the population up a few percent than we do not. Plus it's not like doctors or radiologists always diagnose at perfectly equal accuracy across all populations. Let's not let the perfect become the enemy of the good.

Larrikin 2y ago
[flagged]
- diordiderot 2y ago
  Just opt out blacks and females no?
- appleorchard46 2y ago
  This is obviously a jab, but to answer the unspoken question: if it's still more effective than human doctors for black or female people, then yes it should be used. If it isn't, then don't use it for them. Simple as that. (fixing this problem should be a high priority either way, that goes without saying)
- megaman821 2y ago
  If I'm a black female in a remote village with no doctor, I'm absolutely going to roll the dice with AI. In the mean time these problems should be surfaced and corrected.
  - rvnx 2y ago
    Even if you are not a remote black woman: AI can be a serious helping hand when trying to figure out what diseases you have. Not everybody has access to doctors, sometimes, whole countries don't have good specialists in everything. When Google refuses to answer medical questions (when it could have answered and said "be careful, I'm not really sure"), it's actually putting lives in danger by hiding useful information. If you can, of course it's better to go to a triple Nobel Prize doctor that is 200 USD per session, but not everybody can, and these doctors may not even be available in your country. But otherwise in general, it's better to have the opinion of AI than nothing.
nradov 2y ago
False positive diagnoses cause a huge amount of patient harm. New technologies should only be deployed on a widespread basis when they are justified based on solid evidence-based medicine criteria.
- nonethewiser 2y ago
  No one says you have to use the AI models stupidly. If it works poorly for black women and female women dont use it for them. Or simply dont use it for the initial diagnosis. Use it after the normal diagnosis process as more of a validation step. Anyways, this all points to the need to capture biological information as input or even having seperately models tuned to different factors.
  - nradov 2y ago
    The guidelines on how to use a particular AI model can only be written after extensive clinical research and data analysis. You can't skip that step without endangering patients, and it will take years to do properly for each one.
  - Avshalom 2y ago
    Every single AI company says you should use AI models stupidly. Replacing experts is the whole selling point.
    - nonethewiser 2y ago
      OK so should we optimize for blindly listening to AI companies then?
      - Avshalom 2y ago
        We should assume people will use tools in the manner that they have been sold those tools yes.
        nonethewiser 2y ago
bilbo0s 2y ago
Mmmm... You don't work in healthcare do you? I think it would be extremely bad if people found out that, um, "other already disliked/scapegoated people", get actual doctors and nurses working on them, but "people like me" only get the doctor or nurse checking an AI model. I'm saying that if you were going to do that, you'd better have an extremely high degree of secrecy about what you were doing in the background. Like, "we're doing this because it's medical research" kind of secrecy. Because there's a bajillion ways that could go sideways in today's world. Especially if that model performs worse than some rockstar doctor that's now freed up to take his/her time seeing the, uh, "other already disliked/scapegoated population". Your hospital or clinic's statistics start to look a bit off. Joint commission? Medical review boards? Next thing you know certain political types are out telling everyone how a certain population is getting preferential treatment at this or that facility. And that story always turns into, "All around the nation they're using AI to get <scapegoats> preferential treatment". It's just a big risk unless you're 100% certain that model can perform better than your best physician. Which is highly unlikely. This is the sort of thing you want to do the right way. Especially nowadays. Politics permeates everything in healthcare right now.
tawayf1 2y ago
[flagged]

by _bin_ 2y ago

Larrikin 2y ago

[flagged]

diordiderot 2y ago
Just opt out blacks and females no?
appleorchard46 2y ago
This is obviously a jab, but to answer the unspoken question: if it's still more effective than human doctors for black or female people, then yes it should be used. If it isn't, then don't use it for them. Simple as that. (fixing this problem should be a high priority either way, that goes without saying)
megaman821 2y ago
If I'm a black female in a remote village with no doctor, I'm absolutely going to roll the dice with AI. In the mean time these problems should be surfaced and corrected.
- rvnx 2y ago
  Even if you are not a remote black woman: AI can be a serious helping hand when trying to figure out what diseases you have. Not everybody has access to doctors, sometimes, whole countries don't have good specialists in everything. When Google refuses to answer medical questions (when it could have answered and said "be careful, I'm not really sure"), it's actually putting lives in danger by hiding useful information. If you can, of course it's better to go to a triple Nobel Prize doctor that is 200 USD per session, but not everybody can, and these doctors may not even be available in your country. But otherwise in general, it's better to have the opinion of AI than nothing.

nradov 2y ago

False positive diagnoses cause a huge amount of patient harm. New technologies should only be deployed on a widespread basis when they are justified based on solid evidence-based medicine criteria.

nonethewiser 2y ago
No one says you have to use the AI models stupidly. If it works poorly for black women and female women dont use it for them. Or simply dont use it for the initial diagnosis. Use it after the normal diagnosis process as more of a validation step. Anyways, this all points to the need to capture biological information as input or even having seperately models tuned to different factors.
- nradov 2y ago
  The guidelines on how to use a particular AI model can only be written after extensive clinical research and data analysis. You can't skip that step without endangering patients, and it will take years to do properly for each one.
- Avshalom 2y ago
  Every single AI company says you should use AI models stupidly. Replacing experts is the whole selling point.
  - nonethewiser 2y ago
    OK so should we optimize for blindly listening to AI companies then?
    - Avshalom 2y ago
      We should assume people will use tools in the manner that they have been sold those tools yes.
      - nonethewiser 2y ago

bilbo0s 2y ago

Mmmm... You don't work in healthcare do you? I think it would be extremely bad if people found out that, um, "other already disliked/scapegoated people", get actual doctors and nurses working on them, but "people like me" only get the doctor or nurse checking an AI model. I'm saying that if you were going to do that, you'd better have an extremely high degree of secrecy about what you were doing in the background. Like, "we're doing this because it's medical research" kind of secrecy. Because there's a bajillion ways that could go sideways in today's world. Especially if that model performs worse than some rockstar doctor that's now freed up to take his/her time seeing the, uh, "other already disliked/scapegoated population". Your hospital or clinic's statistics start to look a bit off. Joint commission? Medical review boards? Next thing you know certain political types are out telling everyone how a certain population is getting preferential treatment at this or that facility. And that story always turns into, "All around the nation they're using AI to get <scapegoats> preferential treatment". It's just a big risk unless you're 100% certain that model can perform better than your best physician. Which is highly unlikely. This is the sort of thing you want to do the right way. Especially nowadays. Politics permeates everything in healthcare right now.

tawayf1 2y ago

[flagged]