Take a photo of a barcode or cover
ddrake 's review for:
Two stars for me -- this was okay, but that may simply reflect that this seems to be intended as a high-level overview of AI and similar technologies and their current and future effects on the practice of medicine and healthcare. As someone who works in health IT and follows issues related to AI, machine learning, the economics of heath care, and so on, there was very little in this book that was new to me. If you're looking for a high-level overview of AI and healthcare, this is a good place to start.
I do like Topol's emphasis on having AI, machine learning, and so on, be used to allow doctors to do a better job connecting with patients. It's become obvious in recent years that so-called "social determinants of health" are in many ways much better predictors of health and illness -- in other words, knowing where someone lives and what kind of family relationships they have is, in many cases, more useful than a large battery of fancy lab tests. Perhaps in a similar way, AI can allow us to reconceptualize the doctor-patient relationship as more of a trusted, close advisor/friend.
I do wonder about how much AI and other technology can really enable Topol's "deep empathy" . I see two problems: Baumol's cost disease and regular capitalistic incentives.
First, there's Baumol's cost disease. It seems that doctors and patients would prefer, say, 30 minute visits. But the cost disease argument is that if you have something defined by a fixed amount of time, its cost must rise. Yes, algorithms and machine learning diagnostic tools can improve the care, but if providers and patients want that 30 minutes, that cost must necessarily rise, and you can't get the sort of order-of-magnitude productivity gains that you need to really change costs.
The second thing relates to the larger economic system driven by profit or revenue. Say you've got your 30-minute visits. Doctors and patients like it. Say doctors have 8 hours, or 16 patients, of time a day. But the healthcare system leadership thinks "if we make those visits 25 minutes, the doctors can see 19 patients a day! That's over 18% more patients every day!" But the same logic keeps applying, and before long we're back with the ultra-short rushed visits we have now.
This isn't necessarily about moustache-twirling predatory capitalists; even government-driven programs like Medicare or the NHS can apply this kind of pressure. In addition to longer visits, though, patients also want better access, both for scheduling convenience and medical necessity -- no one wants to wait to see the doctor if you are sick and want advice, but not so sick that emergenccy or urgent care is right.
b
I do like Topol's emphasis on having AI, machine learning, and so on, be used to allow doctors to do a better job connecting with patients. It's become obvious in recent years that so-called "social determinants of health" are in many ways much better predictors of health and illness -- in other words, knowing where someone lives and what kind of family relationships they have is, in many cases, more useful than a large battery of fancy lab tests. Perhaps in a similar way, AI can allow us to reconceptualize the doctor-patient relationship as more of a trusted, close advisor/friend.
I do wonder about how much AI and other technology can really enable Topol's "deep empathy" . I see two problems: Baumol's cost disease and regular capitalistic incentives.
First, there's Baumol's cost disease. It seems that doctors and patients would prefer, say, 30 minute visits. But the cost disease argument is that if you have something defined by a fixed amount of time, its cost must rise. Yes, algorithms and machine learning diagnostic tools can improve the care, but if providers and patients want that 30 minutes, that cost must necessarily rise, and you can't get the sort of order-of-magnitude productivity gains that you need to really change costs.
The second thing relates to the larger economic system driven by profit or revenue. Say you've got your 30-minute visits. Doctors and patients like it. Say doctors have 8 hours, or 16 patients, of time a day. But the healthcare system leadership thinks "if we make those visits 25 minutes, the doctors can see 19 patients a day! That's over 18% more patients every day!" But the same logic keeps applying, and before long we're back with the ultra-short rushed visits we have now.
This isn't necessarily about moustache-twirling predatory capitalists; even government-driven programs like Medicare or the NHS can apply this kind of pressure. In addition to longer visits, though, patients also want better access, both for scheduling convenience and medical necessity -- no one wants to wait to see the doctor if you are sick and want advice, but not so sick that emergenccy or urgent care is right.
b