this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2025
654 points (97.0% liked)

Comic Strips

18170 readers
2071 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] rowdy@lemmy.zip 26 points 3 days ago (10 children)

I hate AI slop as much as the next guy but aren’t medical diagnoses and detecting abnormalities in scans/x-rays something that generative models are actually good at?

[–] Mitchie151@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago

Image categorisation AI, or convolutional neural networks, have been in use since well before LLMs and other generative AI. Some medical imaging machines use this technology to highlight features such as specific organs in a scan. CNNs could likely be trained to be extremely proficient and reading X-rays, CT, MRI scans, but these are generally the less operator dependant types of scan, though they can get complicated. An ultrasound for example is highly dependent on the skill of the operator and in certain circumstances things can be made to look worse or better than they are.

I don't know why the technology hasn't become more widespread in the domain. Probably because radiologists are paid really well and have a vested interest in preventing it... they're not going to want to tag the images for their replacement. It's probably also because medical data is hard to get permission for, to ethically train such a model you would need to ask every patient in for every type of scan it their images can be used for medical research which is just another form/hurdle to jump over for everyone.

[–] MartianSands@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 days ago

It's certainly not as bad as the problems generative AI tend to have, but it's still difficult to avoid strange and/or subtle biases.

Very promising technology, but likely to be good at diagnosing problems in Californian students and very hit-and-miss with demographics which don't tend to sign up for studies in silicon valley

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (6 children)

Basically AI is generally a decent answer to the needle in a haystack problem. Sure, a human with infinite time and attention can find the needle and perhaps more accurately than an AI could, but practically speaking if there's just 10 needles in a haystack it's considered a lost cause to find any of them.

With AI it might find in that same stack 30 needles, of which only 7 of them are the needles, which means the AI finds more wrong answers than right, but ultimately you do end up finding 7 needles when you would have missed all 10 before, coming out ahead.

So long as you don't let an AI rule out review of a scan that a human really would have reviewed, it seems a win to potentially have more overall scans get a decent review and maybe catch things earlier in otherwise impractical preventative scans

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

They skipped the phase where all the doctors were replaced by NPs and PAs.

[–] InvalidName2@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 days ago

My current "provider" is an NP. I like her, she's personable and does the basic stuff well enough. I can understand having her do the basic annual physical type stuff for relatively young and healthy people.

But, for one of my recent visits, they scheduled me with a doctor instead (dunno why), and the experience was honestly almost night and day for the better. Granted, the way my health insurance works (ugh USA), the NP visits only ever cost me a flat amount, perhaps $45 for the copay. The doctor's visit cost me the $45 copay, plus additional coinsurance down the line that I got billed a couple of months later because the clinic apparently charges two different rates depending on whether you see a doctor or not, I guess?

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›