Registration form informs patients that if they do not wish AI to be used, they will need their referring doctor to refer them to a different service provider
If psychiatrists are deciding to require acceptance of AI note-taking, the legal liability of the psychiatrists and penalties for errors in the notes are not enough and should be increased.
Not to mention malpractice insurance up the wazoo… As it be should for doctors.
Just pay for perfectly functional, deterministic, local, voice transcribing like dragon dictate and actually read it afterwards for errors. Or hire a person with an NDA. Sending privileged information overseas to known data miners for transcription is pants on head bonkers given the alternatives.
Need to have a chat with my doctor to see if he’s one of the 40% (there’s a fucking scary number from the RACGP, talk about burying the lede).
frankly, anything that allows the practitioner to focus more solely on the patient is a good thing.
Absolutely.
on device AI pull out relevant bits to populate a template.
As long as it’s on device (or local network, I’d be fine with a e.g. a server for a practice, but say a macbook pro should do the job fine, with full disclosure to patients) it’s OK. Indeed go ahead and use whatever voice transcription / processing you want e.g. whisper or QWEN LLM, don’t care as long as it’s local. The article however cites ‘Heidi health AI/ Microsoft’, and my policy for anything with AI in the title is ‘distrust unless verified’ especially wrt health data.
Admittedly I don’t know ‘Heidi health AI/ Microsoft’ from a box of nails, but Microsoft’s fingers in the pie spooks me immediately. Frankly no commercial AI presents as trustworthy enough for sensitive data in general and incoming IPOs are only going to make that worse as they desperately seek monetization.
If psychiatrists are deciding to require acceptance of AI note-taking, the legal liability of the psychiatrists and penalties for errors in the notes are not enough and should be increased.
Not to mention malpractice insurance up the wazoo… As it be should for doctors.
Just pay for perfectly functional, deterministic, local, voice transcribing like dragon dictate and actually read it afterwards for errors. Or hire a person with an NDA. Sending privileged information overseas to known data miners for transcription is pants on head bonkers given the alternatives.
Need to have a chat with my doctor to see if he’s one of the 40% (there’s a fucking scary number from the RACGP, talk about burying the lede).
Apple’s VoiceCommand feature used the Dragon Dictate algorithm to do voice recognition in early versions of iPhone OS and MacOSX.
It worked OK, even with my thick Strine accent, as long as I used the correct verbs. Then they replaced it with Siri and it all turned to shit.
deleted by creator
Absolutely.
As long as it’s on device (or local network, I’d be fine with a e.g. a server for a practice, but say a macbook pro should do the job fine, with full disclosure to patients) it’s OK. Indeed go ahead and use whatever voice transcription / processing you want e.g. whisper or QWEN LLM, don’t care as long as it’s local. The article however cites ‘Heidi health AI/ Microsoft’, and my policy for anything with AI in the title is ‘distrust unless verified’ especially wrt health data.
Admittedly I don’t know ‘Heidi health AI/ Microsoft’ from a box of nails, but Microsoft’s fingers in the pie spooks me immediately. Frankly no commercial AI presents as trustworthy enough for sensitive data in general and incoming IPOs are only going to make that worse as they desperately seek monetization.
deleted by creator