NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gorgon Zee" data-source="post: 9705591" data-attributes="member: 75787">That's not quite as clear as you might think. There have been a few studies that show comparable or better accuracy from LLMs. Lots of caveats, especially since the papers have mostly used synthetic data, but here are some interesting bits of info:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Patient records are growing massively. One health system reports 20% of their patients have medical records longer than Moby Dick. An LLM can read that and identify relevant details in 1 minute. A doctor cannot do so. So, if you arrive at an ED, and a doctor who does not know you has to review your records, it may be highly valuable to ask the LLM to look for correlations between your records and your symptoms.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Open Evidence -- many, many doctors feel this significantly helps them in their diagnosis. I don't have access so I cannot test it (I'm a doctor of statistics, working in the medical field), but the weight of opinion seems to be that it really does help a doctor make a diagnosis significantly.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">In the US and EU, we have about 800 or 900 doctors for every million people. Other places in the world have 4. In many places in the world, an LLM that is only 95% as good as a doctor is a fantastic advance over no doctor. And in the US, recent legislation will make millions unable to see a doctor, so we're effectively moving into the same space -- a choice between an LLM diagnosis or no diagnosis.</li> </ul>People are just starting to investigate this space now. But my personal POV is that if you do not have medical access, LLMs are significantly better than just web searching. If you do have medical access, LLMs assist doctors by (i) summarizing large volumes of data for specific goals in short times (ii) noticing issues outside a doctor's core specialty (iii) ensuring that standard stuff has been done.LLMs seem good at summarizing and detecting relevant information. They are also pretty good at presenting information in a coherent report. They will absolutely make mistakes, just like in this thread's title. But weigh that against the number of times a human lawyer makes a mistake. We haven't seen decent studies yet, but I am not convinced that the rates are very different.</blockquote>

Verification