193

Is anyone else caught in a weird Venn diagram of Imposter Syndrome and furious indignation and disdain for actual imposters in your field? (self.asklemmy)

submitted 10 months ago by medgremlin to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

45 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Context: I'm a second year medical student and currently residing in the deepest pit in the valley of the Dunning-Kruger graph, but am still constantly frustrated and infuriated with the push for introducing AI for quasi-self-diagnosis and loosening restrictions on inadequately educated providers like NP's from the for-profit "schools".

So, anyone else in a similar spot where you think you're kinda dumb, but you know you're still smarter than robots and people at the peak of the Dunning-Kruger graph in your field?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] PatFussy@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Wasn't there a study that showed that some AI can give a better diagnosis than 99% of doctors? I'm too lazy to look it up.

If that's the case then yeah, you are probably dumber than the robot.

Edit: I looked it up and back in 2020 there was a thing that showed 72%. there is another study for 2024 that supposedly says 97% but it's behind a paywall.

[-] medgremlin 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Here's an article on one of the studies performed last year that showed that ChatGPT has, at best, a 64% chance of putting the correct diagnosis in its differential, and a 39% chance of getting the correct diagnosis as the top of their differential. Link to article: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2806457

Here's the article for the study they did using pediatric case studies: https://arstechnica.com/science/2024/01/dont-use-chatgpt-to-diagnose-your-kids-illness-study-finds-83-error-rate/ I was unable to get a link to the full PDF of the study in JAMA Pediatrics, but this article is a decent summary of it. The pediatric diagnosis success rate was 17%, and of the incorrect diagnoses, a substantial portion of them weren't even in the same organ system as the correct diagnosis.

As it stands, I would trust ChatGPT to be a scribe for a physician provided there is a sufficient speech-recognition system in place, but 64% in the best case scenarios is not a passing score for diagnosis of real humans.

this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2024

193 points (98.0% liked)

Asklemmy

44002 readers

1100 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS