• postman@literature.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    40
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    I’ve used AI for medical transcription before and it is absolutely incredible. It’s not just a word for word text, but a detailed clinical breakdown of everything discussed.

    All you have to do is simply read the damn thing thoroughly and correct whatever minor errors pop up.

    Takes 95% less time.

    • Akasazh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      I’m unsure if there’s an ethical issue with putting patients medical records in the data machine.

      • [object Object]@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        There exists online and offline ML.

        Transcription is not a task that needs a full blown LLM, summarization probably does, and if being done offline or on a server with trusted verifiable lack of logging should be fine. That does not mean send it to ChatGPT API.

        I would hope they store the raw conversation file encrypted with patient records so they can retranscribe later as tools improve.

      • EvilBit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 days ago

        Medical AI has guardrails out the wazoo. By the time it’s made available to a physician, it’s probably been reviewed by a council, vetted by IT, and negotiated heavily by Legal. If the data leaves the premises, it’ll be thoroughly protected and isolated.

        That said, fuck AI. I’d give up medical transcription to get the environment, economy, and sanity back. Musk’s data center is running dozens of natural gas turbines in a low-income, primarily Black neighborhood 11 miles down the road from St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. It’s positively ghoulish.

        • partofthevoice@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Horseshit. Medical AI is using Oracle services. Larry mother fucking Elison is storing and processing this data.

          The medical industry seems so ignorant about this. They think the argument is just about AI. It’s also about the fact that I don’t trust the people you’re partnered with.

          I get so pissed when the AI consent is baked into other paperwork with no opt out. I will leave.

          Edit: https://www.oracle.com/customers/beacon-health/

          Edit: they might not all be, but I’m not authorizing your arbitrary “AI use” clause. You might as well be, now or at some point down the road.

          • EvilBit@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            The agreement is only as good as the hospital’s vetting, so I may be a little optimistic after seeing a very thorough and protracted process on my side. If you work for a healthcare system that’s okay with Beacon and Oracle, then it may be time to evaluate whether they’re a good healthcare system to work for.

        • MangoCats@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 days ago

          Clue: Medical transcription has been done by “AI” for the past 20 years. Source: sister in law was a medical transcriptionist making $80K per year, until Dragon Naturally Speaking and friends decimated her job market.

      • GamingChairModel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        It needs to be a system and a contractual framework that complies with the medical privacy regulations of the place where it’s being used (in the US, HIPAA). I have some doubts about whether specific companies or people will actually comply, or the enforcement of those laws by certain governmental authorities, but I don’t think it’s conceptually impossible to have this kind of tech be compliant with those types of regulations.

    • AeronMelon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      3 days ago

      All you have to do is fire the human who is trained and rarely makes a mistake and replace them with a paid machine that almost always makes a mistake and double check everything yourself (or hire another human to double check it) because someone’s life literally depends on the entirety of the text being absolutely correct.

      AI does work at a level that makes unpaid interns look like career professionals. All for the low cost of completely fucking the environment.

      Glad you like it.

    • halcyoncmdr@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      3 days ago

      Exactly. It is a tool for professionals to use to speed up existing processes. It is not a replacement for people, regardless of what the marketers tell you so you buy their product. I don’t understand how there aren’t thousands of lawsuits against these AI companies for their blatantly false advertising.

      AI keeps proving this day by day when people try to make it a replacement and have it blow up in their faces every day.

      • greyscaleA
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        blatantly false advertising.

        SEC is neutered, what makes you think anyone in charge of advertising rules hasn’t been replaced by a 17 year old called Goebbels Gobbler or something with a DOGE laptop.

        • halcyoncmdr@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          SEC is neutered

          This article is about an incident in Australia. The SEC has no bearing on what Australia can do.

          • greyscaleA
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 days ago

            The AI bubble is an American phenomenon and their SEC isn’t slowing down the insanity. Their lack of a functional SEC is everyones problem.

            • halcyoncmdr@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              It very much is not just an American phenomenon. Are you honestly trying to claim that AI is only being used in America?

              DeepSeek is Chinese. Hugging Face and Mistral are French. DeepL is German. Stability AI (Stable Diffusion) is British. DeepMind (The subsidiary of Google) is based in Britain. And that’s just scratching the surface, there are as many AI companies based outside the US as there are inside the US.

              Just because some of the AI companies are based in the US, that doesn’t mean other countries have no options. Every country still has the right to regulate use in their jurisdiction. Just like various European countries instituting laws governing things like digital markets, AI can be regulated as well.

              • greyscaleA
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                That was my point, its affecting australia too. Because the Americans don’t have a functional SEC.

                • halcyoncmdr@piefed.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  The American SEC doesn’t prevent Australia from regulating AI use in Australia or by Australian companies.

                  That’s literally how every international business works. AI is not special. There’s a lot to blame America for… your government not doing anything about something they can control isn’t one of those things.

                  • greyscaleA
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    Again, you’re tilting at windmills.

                    I’m neither American nor Australian.

      • First_Thunder@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        3 days ago

        Hell, I just found out a few months ago my father’s office (he’s a lawyer) still did transcriptions of court proceedings manually! Full blown lawyers wasting expensive man hours doing that. As soon as I found out I got some random whisper cpp frontend and slapped it on a random computer

        • halcyoncmdr@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          3 days ago

          As long as they still have someone verifying and correcting mistakes, that’s a decent solution. It doesn’t need to be complicated. Whisper is by no means perfect, but from my experience it handles 90% fine, only having to listen and correct 10% is a huge improvement over transcribing everything manually.

          The issues with so much of the current AI use is implementations that completely remove trained human oversight from the equation because the AI companies position it as a complete replacement for employees.

          • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            from my experience it handles 90% fine, only having to listen and correct 10% is a huge improvement over transcribing everything manually.

            I’m curious how this is supposed to work? How do you only listen to 10%? How are you supposed to know which 10% to listen to? Wouldn’t you still need to listen to it all to find that 10%?

            • emmanuel_car@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              3 days ago

              Yes, but listening to it all once and correcting the mistakes as you hear/see them would be faster than transcribing the entire thing, then proof reading.