Machine Learning , some thoughts
bert.verhees at rosa.nl
Mon Jun 25 06:52:07 EDT 2018
On 25-06-18 12:40, GF wrote:
> Providing health and care is part science and for a large part an art.
> Meaning that humans are needed.
> Artificial Intelligence is a nice scientific hyped topic and nothing more.
> That is not to say that AI might play a role and can be of use.
> It needs to be properly designed, engineered and not hacked together.
> It is certain that AI applications in healthcare must be treated as
> Medical Devices.
> For it function properly we need to be able to document healthcare
> topics including the full context/epistemology.
I agree, especially on GP-level, I checked with my wife, she is GP, as
you (Gerard) know. I asked her if the context/epistemology in a EHR is
sufficient for machine-learning. It is not, she sufficient, and that
will never be. GP's have other things to do then carefully record all
datapoints that describe a disease.
Even when using archetyped-systems this does not change.
Allthough, there are some patient-conditions which are very typical for
a disease, mostly this is not the case.
For example, many infection-diseases have fever as a symptom, and one
person gets pain in his back, and the other has headache as a result of
fever and other inconveniences coming with infection disease.
So, the GP cannot do much with machine learning, the best source of
knowledge is his experience, and if he cannot solve with that, he should
ask someone else, or send the patient to the hospital to a specialist.
But there, machine learning can do things in some specialties.
Anyway, thanks for your reply
More information about the openEHR-clinical