Imagine if instead of face to face, doctor transactions were via text. The questioning of the doctor can be monitored and patterns in decision trees observed could be codified, and weighed against the healthcare outcome (however defined).
What is missing, however, is the Counterfactual Reasoning. The "why" matters. The machine cannot reduce the doctor's choice of decision trees from all possible combinations, only that which it observes the doctor perform.
Tail-cases like rare genetic disorders would often be missed.
Tail-case like rare genetic disorders are often missed by doctors too. I have several friends who had Lyme disease with fairly serious complications (in the Northeast) (Not that Lyme disease is that rare - it's actually much more common than is expected). Each of them got misdiagnosed for multiple years by multiple different doctors until finally getting the correct diagnosis/treatment. So every system is fallible.
I actually disagree with this, but only slightly.
Imagine if instead of face to face, doctor transactions were via text. The questioning of the doctor can be monitored and patterns in decision trees observed could be codified, and weighed against the healthcare outcome (however defined).
What is missing, however, is the Counterfactual Reasoning. The "why" matters. The machine cannot reduce the doctor's choice of decision trees from all possible combinations, only that which it observes the doctor perform.
Tail-cases like rare genetic disorders would often be missed.