No, because it’s wrong just enough to slip errors into your medical report that seem plausible, but can be dangerously wrong.

You can and should say no to AI writing anything into your medical report.

People get lazy and don’t review things as carefully when they see it’s usually correct, and you don’t always get the opportunity to read all the notes of your medical report yourself.

Doctors aren’t writing their notes either way, it’s sent to the Philippines or it’s sent to ai. Why would they bother writing themselves when they can see another patient in that time and double their income.

Dunno where that leaves is though, rage at the for profit health industry I guess :/

And either way the practice management software they use is mining those notes to advertise www.magentus.com/…/data-management-services/?r=a - highly regulated but there’s always cowboys

At least a human can learn and understand when there’s logical inconsistencies.

I’d much rather a call center in the Philippines does it than a computer that has no idea what the context is.

An in person scribe is actually best, cause there’s a second set of eyes on the information, and they can ask clarifying questions at the time of the appointment. That’s how my doc does it.

Hey now, don’t shoot the messenger, I was just grounding the conversation in the reality of how I’ve seen doctors typically work (in Australia).

But …your doc has an In person scribe? That sounds pretty great! It is another arrow in the side of the for profit medical industry that not everyone has access to this level of service.

Don’t think they’re call centers, docs just record in a little recorder and send it to transcription services, it’s not live or anything. They don’t get more context than the recording itself…

Doctors aren’t writing their notes either way

This is far from a universal truth. While it’s true that local professional medical transcriptionists are much rarer today than they were 20 years ago as a lot of doctors started using software (I remember when “Dragon: Naturally Speaking” really hit the stage everyone thought it would be revolutionary), in my experience there are a lot less doctors even using transcription these days. Some of the old timers still do since they never really bothered to learn to type, but a lot of them just type into a computer in the exam room with patients.

Maybe that’s a regional thing, I don’t know, but it is definitely the norm in my part of the world.

remimds me of those awful youtube ai transcriptions

Voice transcription predates AI. I remember using a piece of software called dragon back in 2010 to transcribe my dissertation.

Yes, and also, LLM’s aren’t as reliable at transcription as Dragon Dictation was back in 2010.

It’s shocking how crappy AI is, we’re actually moving backwards in real time.

I hate it. I recently went through a formal diagnosis process with a psychiatrist. And he used AI transcription. It was clear from the notes that it was mostly surface-level details. The notes included things I mentioned, but lacked depth and synthesis. The point of requiring doctors to write down notes is not just for record-keeping. The synthesis step is essential. And you completely lose that with an AI transcriber. Instead of summarizing with a clinical synthesis in mind, it just blindly copies down surface-level details. You end up with a long and detailed but extremely vapid session record.