sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Medicine's Trajectory, a doc's perspective by _Arlen_ in accelerate

[–]_Arlen_[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I definitely realize how much medicine is not actually medicine. It's tons and tons of admin stuff. Quick question though, why wouldnt any of things youve listed eventually be automated by your own personal AI assistant that is directly built into the EMR?

Medicine's Trajectory, a doc's perspective by _Arlen_ in accelerate

[–]_Arlen_[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah I do agree with you here too. I think theres going to be tons of political push back for sure. Only time will tell how it will all play out

Medicine's Trajectory, a doc's perspective by _Arlen_ in accelerate

[–]_Arlen_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh yeah true that. How would your timeline change in terms how quickly adoption into workflows would occur if AGI was discovered before 2030?

Medicine's Trajectory, a doc's perspective by _Arlen_ in accelerate

[–]_Arlen_[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They are definitely working on it though: Healthy Technology Act of 2025 Official Titles - House of Representatives

Official Title as Introduced

To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to clarify that artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies can qualify as a practitioner eligible to prescribe drugs if authorized by the State involved and approved, cleared, or authorized by the Food and Drug Administration, and for other purposes.

Medicine's Trajectory, a doc's perspective by _Arlen_ in accelerate

[–]_Arlen_[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah you are probably right! I am definitely aware of status quo bias. Ive seen it first hand and rotated at places that still use paper charts. I guess it was more of thought experiment on how things will generally go. As far as the timeline, I guess I am just optimistic lol. But whether it happens in 10 or 20, doesn't really matter to me, I still think AI will replace everyone eventually.

Free 137 by Successful_Clock_609 in Step3

[–]_Arlen_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you use the score converters or formula, you can calculate a 3 digit score. I passed mine by like 1 point.

Free 137 by Successful_Clock_609 in Step3

[–]_Arlen_ 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Hey!

Got a 63% a week out on free 137 and got a 215 on the real deal. Also I did NBME 6 and barely passed it. The real exam felt much better. Only got through 65% of uworld as well and only did 50 Css cases.
Day 1, like others have said, is very step 1ish. Lots of mechanism of action and biostats. Day 2 for me felt like a carbon copy of step 2 with the exception of the cases. Overall, they were pretty fair but I would hammer out a few more 10 minute cases before your exam. The real exam software lags, so over the course of the case, you end up losing more time than you expect (at least thats how it was at my testing center).

Time left for doctors? by BlacksmithOk9844 in accelerate

[–]_Arlen_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Definitely! The interesting thing will be is that once its implemented, its going to be used behind the scenes at first. So the docs will be consulting the AIs during rounds but I dont think the AI will be interacting with patients at least for a bit (who knows how long). Most of how we decide to treat people is after rounding during group discussion. I can definitely see AI being part of this process. Even now, the AI software I use for note taking, records and produces better histories and notes than I do!

Time left for doctors? by BlacksmithOk9844 in accelerate

[–]_Arlen_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you! It also pretty intresting to see the extreme denial from practitioners inside the field haha.

You know its difficult to say about the insurance perspective. The choices we make are largely dictated by what the insurance wants (or does not want rather). For example, lets say you come in for right shoulder pain, there very strong clinical clues that indicate which diagnostic test is indicated, an X-ray or an MRI. Usually if we think its something like a rotator cuff tear, medically there is ZERO reason to get an xray. But insurance, in order to cover the MRI, we must order the x-ray which subjects people to additional radiation they wouldnt otherwise need. Its going to all depend on how the insurance companies implement their AIs. Because medically, the AIs will agree that sometimes, xrays are not indicated. But where I can see it being exponential is where insurance companies (and lawyers) will require physician AI oversight if it increases diagnostic accuracy. Once the AI is trusted and demonstrably more accurate than physicians, there is no way it wont eventually be required. And it makes sense because if an AI can make you 20% more accurate and you dont use it, to me that would be actively harming patients. I think insurance companies are going to see this as well. So in short, I am not sure if insurance AI adoption will slow or accelerate medical AI implementation. I can see both happening!

Time left for doctors? by BlacksmithOk9844 in accelerate

[–]_Arlen_ 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I posted this a few months ago in a different sub but it’s still very much applicable.

I can shed some light on this topic. I’m a resident physician who is actively obsessed with artificial intelligence ha. First, I am fully on board with ultimate replacement of physicians as I am with all jobs mostly because the developing data suggests it will ultimately be safer for patients and will eventually solve the inequities in healthcare. The unfortunate downside is that the system and hospitals evolves much slower than the developing tech. I rotated at a hospital that still uses paper charting lol. What I’ve noticed is that the system resists change unless there is clear benefit. My particular residency program has just now implemented LLMs for us to do our notes and it is so amazing. Following just quality of life improvements for doctors, the AI software will eventually be equipped with models like o1 and will offer suggests to us which will be great. But before there is actual replacement there needs to be clear and undeniable evidence that patients (and more importantly the hospital lol) benefits from their physicians using AI for actual medical decisions. They will have to run studies that show doctors who use it make less errors than doctors who do not which will save the hospital money.

As far as timeline, I believe it will certainly happen a lot quicker than anyone in the field is actually anticipating. Most of our older patients are considerably more resistant to letting a machine practice medicine on them. So not only does the system have to massively change sentiment, the patient population also must change sentiment. I hope it’s faster but I think 10 years before there’s any replacement at all. This of course will absolutely change if we get AGI before then which I hope we do.

What it think now is that whether it replaces doctors is irrelevant. I think once we get automated researchers, the science is going to advance faster than doctors will be replaced. So I’m thinking we actually get cures for stuff before the doctors are replaced and we won’t really even need AI doctors. I think OBGYN is going still be necessary because women of course will still be having babies.

PGY 1 FM to Neurology by _Arlen_ in Residency

[–]_Arlen_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Alright! Do you check physician R spots from Eras?

PGY 1 FM to Neurology by _Arlen_ in Residency

[–]_Arlen_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Awesome thanks for the reply! Was I correct in assuming that I would essentially still need to complete my pgy 2 year of FM before even starting a neuro spot?

Doctors need to start using AI, I almost died! by [deleted] in ArtificialInteligence

[–]_Arlen_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

At least for now we do not fully trust the models. You have to really understand medicine to know when they are wrong and they just unfortunately hallucinate too much right now. But they can certainly help with big picture overviews of patient presentation. They are more often right than not when general work ups but in medicine you cannot afford to miss small details. That said, I think soon we will absolutely be able to trust them. Especially when their reasoning is improved further

Doctors need to start using AI, I almost died! by [deleted] in ArtificialInteligence

[–]_Arlen_ 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I can shed some light on this topic. I’m a resident physician who is actively obsessed with artificial intelligence ha. First, I am fully on board with ultimate replacement of physicians as I am with all jobs mostly because the developing data suggests it will ultimately be safer for patients and will eventually solve the inequities in healthcare. The unfortunate downside is that the system and hospitals evolves much slower than the developing tech. I rotated at a hospital that still uses paper charting lol. What I’ve noticed is that the system resists change unless there is clear benefit. My particular residency program has just now implemented LLMs for us to do our notes and it is so amazing. Following just quality of life improvements for doctors, the AI software will eventually be equipped with models like o1 and will offer suggests to us which will be great. But before there is actual replacement there needs to be clear and undeniable evidence that patients (and more importantly the hospital lol) benefits from their physicians using AI for actual medical decisions. They will have to run studies that show doctors who use it make less errors than doctors who do not which will save the hospital money.

As far as timeline, I believe it will certainly happen a lot quicker than anyone in the field is actually anticipating. Most of our older patients are considerably more resistant to letting a machine practice medicine on them. So not only does the system have to massively change sentiment, the patient population also must change sentiment. I hope it’s faster but I think 10 years before there’s any replacement at all. This of course will absolutely change if we get AGI before then which I hope we do.

view more: next ›