Notes need writing though.

You can do that by recording and transcribing (many methods) or your doctor has to write on the fly, or worse, has their head in their computer while you talk in their general direction.

Letting doctors talk and examine and not write is a wholly better experience.

Offsite third parties are the problem here. If this was done automatically without data leaving the room, is there a problem? Do you have the same objections to how your digital notes are stored?

▲

slumberlust 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

We agree on the desired outcome, but couldn't we also give doctors more time to do that job without AI? Feels like the blame is in the wrong place.

▲

alistairSH 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Maybe it's a regional thing, but in my last 3 appointments, 2 had an assistant doing the note-taking (as prompted by the treating physician or PA). The third was a virtual appointment, so no idea what notes were taken, if any.

	▲	oliwarner 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Sounds cushy, but not everywhere can afford 2:1 healthcare for every primary contact. It's not a thing here until you get to a ward or hospital-based clinic and you're seeing a team. I don't like off-site data vacuums. Palantir can get fucked. But good ML transcription tools don't have to be run off-site. Even to get you 90%, or serve as a backup. And as I've said in other threads here, it's hard to be angry about consented audio recording and AI transcription when my entire medical history is floating around in a database that could be hacked, or its data deliberately passed through (eg) a Palantir tool. I think audio of me complaining about lower back pain is the very least of our worries. Personally, I'd prefer AI and better doctor availability. To have that admin time back as consultation time, or more appointments, or just less overworked doctor. But also, there have to be weapons grade consequences for people that leak patient data. Loss of registration, never allowed to work with sensitive data again and jail.