Can a Computer Replace your Doctor?
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/21/sunday-review/high-tech-health-care-useful-to-a-point.html
As, the title suggests this article is can or will a computer (ever) replace a doctor? Has the Artificial Intelligence research and in general Computer Science algorithms developed to an extent, that a doctor with a minimum of 8 - 10 years of medical school education be replaced? The article focuses on this question from two aspects. One is the aspect from Silicon Valley and the other is from a doctor's point of view.
Silicon Valley has transformed several fields of life and is now onto transforming medicine to a point where an AI algorithm could potentially replace your doctor. The spearheads of Silicon Valley agree that they would trust and rather use a computer algorithm/robot over a doctor. Innovation of healthcare products are in such a fast pace that people might even believe it might be true. From the technologist perspective it seems to be in the right direction and since they also look into their revenue, healthcare devices seem to be giving a pretty good revenue model.
However, when this question is addressed from the doctor and Elisabeth Rosenthal's point of view, you see the bigger and deeper picture. A computer algorithm or an AI robot is just a mere tool that would guide you to a diagnosis; a bridge between a patient and his symptoms. The data provided by health tracking devices is so huge that it is hard to make sense out of it by a robot; only a doctor's presence would help make "sense" out of it for a corresponding treatment. On the other hand, if the doctor's role is given to a machine it might interpret normal data as "normal", when the patient has can actually be suffering from a condition. The article particularly emphasis a patient suffering from arrhythmias could have a normal heartbeat but actually be in trauma of knowing that, normal testosterone level might lead to a condition like Low T, etc.
In conclusion, though useful technologies has helped several people at diagnosing health ailments better especially blood glucose level and getting broader knowledge on the same, it still does not replace a doctor, rather it is a tool that would assist both you and your doctor. An analogy that the article mentions that I would like to re-iterate: Apple Maps had severe hidden bugs and lead people to "nowhere", clearly hinting it was a tool for them to use and not trust! If only they had asked someone?
My opinion on this article aligns with the author. As the following articles reinforce the same: http://www.mobilehealthglobal.com/in-the-news/news/125/will-robots-replace-doctors and http://www.imedicalapps.com/2011/02/ibm-watson-replace-physician-artificial-intelligence/. A doctor with training for about a decade can not replace a robot fed with data, because at the end it is more amount making sense of the data on a personal level with the patient rather than just spit out the possible actions to be taken. Computer algorithms can only assist doctors in better understanding the condition of the patient and possibly suggesting criteria that a doctor could have possibly missed out. But, at the end, the doctor's personal interaction with the patient is what matters that robots/AI would fail at like eye contact, possible underlying trauma, emotions etc.
ReplyDeleteThe article mentioned in this comment also talks about the infamous IBM Watson that was successful in winning against few of the best Jeopardy players would not make the cut as it can never understand the clinical side of it and neither can it's creators. Hence, the best potential would be for technology to pair with doctors.
You linked to a very helpful Ted Med talk about the reason why machines make us smarter, "and machines DO make us smarter." Here is the link, but I'll post it, too. Will a machine be my new doctor?
ReplyDelete