Error by AI scribe during medical appointment leaves patient devastated

Join the discussion

• Hacker News
• I am surprised the doctors do not have to review a bit the transcription. I do have to review my code before deployment
  by eelioss
• The classic whisper model will give you text in silent moments too. A lot of these guys just wrapped that. You can’t just do the minimal thing. Well I guess you can and you’ll get sales but it won’t correctly solve the problem.

  My cousin used one of these apps with patient consent and said she then has to listen to the audio and rewrite it all. Stopped for that reason. Wasn’t even a time saver.

  Strangely, I think Robin really just mistimed this. They stopped just as the state of the art came out and with their human in the loop transcription they might have been quite useful.

  by arjie
• Not only did the AI apparently hallucinate psilocybin consumption, but the doctor then hallucinated internal bleeding as a risk, which is not a known risk of such mushrooms.

  But this seems a bit click baity.

  You can challenge your medical record, and presumably an AI transcription service would be in there. Unless .au is special in that way.

  by newsomix9xl
• You can optimize work. But you can't optimize AWAY work. If you depend on human attention, expertise and judgement, as we do in medicine, you need that trained doctor to have the time to look at the transcript and think carefully about the contents. If we use AI as a way to help doctors spend even less time on each patient's case, we're going at it the wrong way. It shouldn't help cut costs, it should help improve the quality of care.
  by Arn_Thor
• > There's evidence that for the first few weeks of using AI, [people] check things pretty carefully and then at a point they stop checking because they assume it will be right.

  I think this is an issue people often overlook / does not get enough weight in the discussion.

  I do wonder that, when such profound technologies (such as AI, social media) are rolled out, should they be subjected to studies from the "human perspective" for a longer period of time.

  However, this might be impossible in the current system.

  by tanelih
• The other side is that I have witnessed doctors making mistakes personally on medical files. They are overworked and only see you for 15 minutes and in a rush to kick you out and so of course they make errors. It would be interesting to compare whether transcription software or humans make the most mistakes. Guessing the answer will be very nuanced such as transcription software failing for accents not trained on, how over worked the clinic is etc.
  by pizzly
• A friend recently had a drug test added to their blood draw for an unrelated health check at a hospital. When she questioned the nurse about it turned out the doctors make notes that are transcribed by AI. And in this case the AI had mistakenly transcribed that she was on fentanyl patches.

  "the nurse who was trying to be very nice said in a less sweet tone that the doctor is supposed to review the notes so this does not happen. And that she is very glad I caught it and the doctor will be glad too. I do not know if this was something Very Serious or an ongoing problem or what."

  Given this threads story is the second incident of this I've heard in a week it seems like it is a common error with very serious consequences.

  by superkuh
• I am shocked by the comments in this thread ranging from “yeah but humans also make mistakes” to “yeah but how many mistakes does an AI do compared to a human”. Neither of those is the point here. We have doctors that have employed AI as a software to help them and that software is flawed. I am a software developer and if I write some piece of medical software with bugs that are so blatant in it, I'd see hell up to potentially being sued into oblivion
  by kioleanu