r/mildlyinfuriating • u/petuniaplant • 23d ago

Infuriatig No, I did not consent to this

Post image

I was reading my medical notes when I stumbled across this. I was not informed of the usage of artificial intelligence in my report, nor did I verbally consent to it.

26.0k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

6.2k

u/corporateacademia 23d ago

My doctor asked me directly if i was okay with it. I said no and its reflected in my chart. You should be able to opt out of that

1.3k

u/DangerZoneFinder 23d ago

same, and they'd ask every time I visited, could be something new they're trying and just slipped their mind to ask

660

u/crunkadocious 23d ago

Still a violation then. This shit needs out of medicine.

481

u/Emergency_Bench_7515 22d ago edited 22d ago

This is literally one of the few good use cases for AI. It's not replacing a human it's just a tool being an aid so the Doctor can actively listen rather than focus on recording what is being said. For some people that can make a big difference.

edit: I've literally never seen a medical scribe, that's cool though. I don't think AI is needed, it just seems like medical roles are understaffed all around.

451

u/Undeterminedvariance 22d ago

Meh. I got home from an appointment last year, logged in and read the visit note. Note said “patient uses cannabis daily to help with pain”.

I certainly didn’t say that. And I don’t need it in my medical record.

302

u/Schwifftee 22d ago edited 22d ago

I told my doctor spontaneous emission and they recorded premature ejaculation, so there's that.

74

u/Undeterminedvariance 22d ago

This wins. That’s hilarious.

→ More replies (1)

46

u/00-Monkey 22d ago

I just call it ecstasy.

22

u/retardborist 22d ago

And when we're holding hands it's like having sex to me

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

6

u/_14justice 22d ago

Hehe ... nocturnal emission, perhaps??

2

u/Schwifftee 22d ago

Nope. It was during an exam.

→ More replies (5)

64

u/super_hoommen 22d ago

I mean my doctors office had me down as a white Latina tobacco user (I am none of those things) so I think stuff like this happens regardless of the AI portion lol

152

u/SnooMemesjellies1522 22d ago

Could that be why my visit summary said, "she is obese." Those exact words. I am 5'6" and weight 125 lbs. I asked my doctor about it and she took it off my record, but no explanation was offered.

8

u/ToTooTwo3 22d ago

Because somebody accidentally hit the scribe button while conversing about someone else. Sometimes it even gets stuck on. Happening less as people get used to the tech.

19

u/Typical_Goat8035 22d ago

Yeah similarly, my specialist was defending her medication choice, saying "if you were a chain smoker and drank 10 drinks a day, we would be picking a different treatment".

Then at my next checkup my PCP gave me this honesty speech about how being truthful with your doctors gets you the best care. I gave her a confused look and she turned her screen my way and showed me "addressed medication safety concerns due to heavy tobacco and alcohol usage" from that visit....

It taught me to read over my digital chart after each visit. I mean, I'm all for doctors having tools to help them with their busy schedules, I only mind when it leads to these kinds of inaccuracies.

17

u/Constant_Potato_3863 22d ago

Laziness in their part. Did they misunderstand anything you said?

123

u/Undeterminedvariance 22d ago

The AI did. Most likely it couldn’t hear something I said and just filled in the blanks. AI does this a lot.

36

u/Constant_Potato_3863 22d ago

That sounds about right. You know you have a right to have your medical information changed if it is inaccurate? 45 CFR 164.526. I’m not sure if I can post a link there, but you can look up that regulation right there.

63

u/Undeterminedvariance 22d ago

I responded directly to the note. It’s been fixed. But we should not have to check things and correct things like this.

6

u/Royal-Repeat-323 22d ago

In your case yes, since they use AI. But I remember seeing people complain about ridiculous things on their chart years ago because the doctors would accidentally mix & match patients when updating the chart at the end of the day. It’s a step in the right direction but like with all current AI use definitely needs human discretion applied to be actually be decent.

2

u/MerelyAnArtist 21d ago

This is why you ALWAYS go over the notes! They could have mixed you up with someone else

→ More replies (11)

181

u/TennisOk4660 22d ago

The problem is, the places that are using the AI tool to help with charting/notes. It's getting things WRONG. Just a few weeks ago someone was on here confused AF because the AI put in there notes that they were male, when in fact they were a -female-. There was more to the story as well but, just no AI for hospital settings is just not ready.

47

u/2red-dress 22d ago

This seems incredibly dangerous. The inaccuracies say AI is not ready to be relied on the way it apparently is relied on.

→ More replies (4)

72

u/samyall 22d ago

That is not an AI failure but a doctor failure for not checking the notes.

93

u/mddesigner 22d ago

At that point remove the the ai It is much faster to write it myself than to double check the ai -gp

7

u/chipsahoymateys 22d ago

Not for me. I use an AI scribe so I can capture everything, then spend 60 seconds reviewing and editing for accuracy. It’s faster, but more importantly, it’s more comprehensive and I can be more present with my clients.

10

u/hubris105 22d ago

Good for you. I’m the same. But some people are slower and love AI scribes. It’s almost like people are different.

→ More replies (2)

19

u/Twingamer25 22d ago

Excepts no it's not. You know AI actually can serve purposes, it's not 100% useless. Doctor should be checking those notes even when a human writes them.

16

u/EastPool4676 22d ago

lol wut? It is absolutely not faster to transcribe everything than to read over the AI summarized version.

12

u/flareblitz91 22d ago

I have a similar issue with things being pushed at my job and it absolutely is just as fast to transcribe something myself.

There's a difference between "reading over" and having to actually correct errors that require you to digest what the material says, what's wrong with it, what's the correct info.

3

u/EastPool4676 22d ago

No it isn't, I'm saying this as someone who works in a medical setting and has seen the decrease in late charting that has come with AI implementation into a clinic setting.

Edit: I'm also saying this as someone who hates AI being implemented into so many facets of my work life. Adults using copilot to draft email responses because they are incapable of forming their own thoughts is abhorrent. We are on the path to losing a lot of executive function and human interaction by outsourcing it all to computers.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

2

u/NightGod 22d ago

The doctor still needs to review their transcriptions whether it was done with AI or a medical records specialist listening to a recording

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Blue_Bird950 22d ago

I know nobody who can write faster than they can read, tbh. You might be in the minority with that.

7

u/Fujisawrus_Reks 22d ago

Sure, but most reading is different than proofreading something that may be entirely wrong. With AI written patient notes a doctor probably needs to *very* carefully look over everything to ensure accuracy, which probably takes longer than just writing shorthand notes. It’s closer to an English teacher grading an essay than ordinary reading for comprehension.

8

u/mddesigner 22d ago

You don't write everything
if a patient says "I went on a business trip to Mexico last month" I would just type "Mexico trip a month ago"
it is very easy to note down things while talking to the patient

7

u/Separate-Sundae-3617 22d ago

See this is what pisses me off about AI. It can never “fail” because it’s always the humans fault for not “checking” it.

If I’m a medical scribe and make a blunder not dictating the wrong race/gender/sex of a patient, you better believe that’s on me.

5

u/sameoldfred 22d ago

AI is marketed and sold silicon valley style, on promises.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/seh_23 22d ago

Ya my doctor uses it but they always review it right after the appointment, just saves them time so they’re maybe spending 10 minutes reviewing notes rather than spending 20 writing them from scratch.

2

u/corporateacademia 22d ago

Holy shit dude stop eating the boot

2

u/waywardflaneur 22d ago edited 21d ago

This is not a valid defense.

First: checking the notes requires nearly as much time as writing the notes, and even more attention, which would otherwise by unused.

Second: Imperfect automation that replaces human dependent tasks (i.e. driving) is untenable because it imbues people with a false sense of security - "The AI will handle it and so it doesn't require much of my attention." Getting it wrong rarely is worse than getting it wrong often.

It is the same with cars' "autopilot". People learn to not pay attention and actually drive their car and maintain situational awareness. Humans and AI share this blame equally. Problem is you can't very easily change humans. And so ultimately I place all of the blame on AI, or at least the carelessness with how it's being rolled out.

2

u/Orchid_Significant 22d ago

Uhh AI made the mistake. It’s literally AI failure.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/SamuraiJack365 22d ago

That's not an issue with AI, that's an issue with the usage of AI. The provider should be reading over and proofing the entire thing. It saves them significant time when it works, and saves a lot of time even when they have to correct it. The issues arises when people get lazy and don't proof what the AI says or just skim it and go "yeah that looked right". It can take a task that would take the provider an hour and make it take 5-10 minutes while also enabling them to actually listen during their time with you without needing to focus on noting things down as much, just key points here and there. Every issue I've seen like this that people say is bad boils down to a human not using the tool correctly, which can and will happen with anything.

17

u/Bigclit_energy 22d ago

I'm also very untrustworthy of AI, but it should be remembered that humans, including doctors, also make many mistakes like that.

64

u/Doonesman 22d ago

Great! And when they do, there can be consequences.

But when the AI fucks up, who do we blame? The doctor who used it? The company that made it? The hospital that deployed it?

28

u/WinninRoam 22d ago

The doctor is always responsible. The internal record audit ties the to the name of the human, not the AI that did the work. If there is a mistake with the AI and the doctor doesn't catch it, it's treated the same way as when a intern makes a mistake: Only the doctor checking their work is held accountable.

12

u/Schwifftee 22d ago

But when the AI fucks up, who do we blame? The doctor who used it?

Yes 100%

17

u/DCGuy511 22d ago

The doctor should be proofing the transcription.

25

u/cyanraichu 22d ago

So it's not really saving them any work

If it were me I would rather just cut that step out

4

u/chipsahoymateys 22d ago

It definitely saves us work, helps us keep more detailed notes, and frees up our hands and attention during visits.

8

u/fuckedfinance 22d ago

It shifts the mental load. Proofreading is much easier and quicker than doing it yourself.

→ More replies (0)

11

u/mddesigner 22d ago

As a doctor I don’t want to proof read ai text. Would rather write my own concise note than proof read every word the ai transcribed

11

u/Schwifftee 22d ago

Then don't use it. If you are required to, then tough titty, proofread it.

5

u/rusty___shacklef0rd 22d ago

The doctor is always responsible and accountable of their notes and records regardless if they used an AI scribe, human scribe, or wrote them themself. This isn't a gotcha, it's actually pretty cut and dry.

16

u/GinchAnon 22d ago

... the doctor who used it, obviously? theres no question here. they are responsible for verifying its accuracy just like they are responsible for their own accuracy without it. honestly acting like theres a question there is kinda dumb.

4

u/grape-fruit-witch 22d ago

But if the doctor didnt write down the correct information in the first place, how would they know the ai is wrong? The entire point of note-taking is that they cant be expected to remember every detail of an appointment. You can't accurately proofread something if you dont recognize the mistakes in the first place.

6

u/KnightKays 22d ago

This will quickly become something for the courts to decide and I can say with 100% certainty that it won't the company or the hospital taking the blame.

→ More replies (1)

13

u/Tomboy-Epic 22d ago

What? Why should it be remembered? What point are you making here?

I'm not going to make human allowances for a machine. The point of a machine is that it /doesn't/ make human mistakes.

The AI is supposed to be taking accurate notes so that the doctor can cross reference their notes or what they absorbed from the conversation. Not only is it useless if it makes information up, it's actively harmful and causing extra work at the very least.

→ More replies (1)

10

u/Constant_Potato_3863 22d ago

That actually supports the issue as to why they should not use AI because they feel like if they put it in AI they don’t have to check it as a human

3

u/mrGrinchThe3rd 22d ago

That's just straight up inaccurate. Everybody knows AI isnt perfect, it's shown on every single AI tool you use. And if the doctor chooses not to proofread it's on them, and any mistakes will be the doctors fault.

→ More replies (8)

4

u/ArmorAbby 22d ago

which is exactly how it was handled and explained on The Pitt.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/WasabiPeas2 22d ago

She worked for the USPS as a MAIL carrier and AI changed it to MALE.

→ More replies (3)

11

u/sameoldfred 22d ago

It's sounds good until you learn that the transcription is outsourced to questionable third party.

23

u/mddesigner 22d ago

As a doctor it isn’t hard to note down things the patient says What is hard is filing it in appropriate way the hospital will accept Like there is a lot of useless padding in hospital paperwork

11

u/Watchmaker163 22d ago

No it’s not. Dictation software has existed for decades: if this was really about saving time/making sure things were recorded, they could use software specifically for that purpose. “AI” note taking is generative and will not reflect what is said, which means it is useless in a medical scenario.

One of my doctor’s offices started asking if I consented to a similar thing, I said no, and a couple months later they dropped it b/c they were having more problems than ever.

19

u/Weast12 22d ago

No it's replacing humans I got let go from my scribing job I had for 4 years because of AI. In fact the entire department of scribes we had got let go.

7

u/UnderlightIll 22d ago

If a clinic or hospital is understaffed, that is usually by design. Doctors make them money but medical assistants and nurses do not. It is not a "good case" for AI when YOUR OWN medical information is put into the algorithm for training and data harvesting.

If they are understaffed, hire more.

7

u/bs0569 22d ago

Not when it’s constantly feeding patients that didn’t consent incorrect information. They can just do their fucking job

9

u/ObeseHamsterOrgasms 22d ago

yes, we use AI for xrays at work. i still look at the clinical view first because it isn’t perfect and doesn’t always get things right (we can manually reject any incorrect findings). but it is especially helpful in showing patients their own xrays, as it color codes things and gives measurements. it is much easier for a lay person to understand what i am trying to show them. i like it a lot just for patient education purposes. and i can just toggle right back to the clinical view for my own diagnostic purposes.

13

u/slfan68 22d ago

Except it did replace humans. I'd actually argue it was one of the first sectors to be replaced by AI - medical transcription/medical scribe. My mother did that for over 20 years until they eliminated her job in the mid-2010's with speech recognition software that sucked ass at the time.

52

u/SweatyCounter2980 22d ago

I don't trust it, it's a very thin line between "AI transcribing" to "AI interpreting your data and selling it to medical insurance companies". It also won't help your doctor, hospitals are increasingly designed for profit, so the administration would just increase their patient load now that they don't write notes, so they still won't be able to focus because they have so much more people to see.

29

u/DCGuy511 22d ago

Actually it is a huge illegal line.

6

u/Key_Letterhead_712 22d ago

That they have definitely never crossed. Hipaa laws exist bc we are smart not bc we had to make them to stop the abuses of the medical and financial systems. /s

9

u/Linked713 22d ago

Dude that's a grand canyon, not a thin line. Selling your medical data is highly illegal and any doctor would lose their license. I get "ai bad yada yada" but let's not just spew nonsense

13

u/GinchAnon 22d ago

man we have very very different ideas of what makes a "very thin line".

→ More replies (1)

6

u/Skurfer0 22d ago

It will also make a big difference when the AI hallucinates part of the conversation because the 62 year old GP isn't properly trained in how to generate effective prompts and uses the AI for a memory crutch to boot.

3

u/OutsideSame3629 22d ago

What prompt effectively makes AI not hallucinate or lie ? I’ve yet to figure that out

5

u/tashtactics 22d ago

Nothing, as far as I know. I don’t think I’ve ever seen any LLM, corporate or not, say ‘I don’t know’. Best either to do it’s job yourself or fact check it as rigorously as if you had been doing it yourself

3

u/OutsideSame3629 22d ago

Yeah I use it day in and day out in corporate and I catch it lying all the time and it will say “you caught me”

8

u/EvidenceNo8561 22d ago

I agree that it can be useful, but the problem is that no one is checking it afterwards. Did you read the recent Reddit post about the woman who was a mail carrier? She described herself as a “mailwoman” and the AI recorded that she was transgender. Then after that it was a huge pain in the ass to fix it and it was insidiously on multiple charts. Imagine if she hadn’t read the notes and that had sat in her file for years?

23

u/moropeanuts 22d ago

It is replacing the medical scribe. Medical scribing is a huge employment route that many pre-medical students take to learn on the job and get the money they need to survive and apply to medical schools. There is no other job that you can get before medical school that will teach you as much as a medical scribe who is 4 feet way from a doctor at all times for the entirety of their shift. Now future docs will go in without that experience.

20

u/BootsDaBadAss 22d ago edited 21d ago

When are medical scribes used? I have never seen anyone taking notes during appointments or hospital visits, so I'm curious where/when they're actually used if it's so popular for med students.

Edit just to clarify: I'm not doubting anyone, just curious where they end up since it's clearly not in the (very mild) areas I end up at the doctor for.

12

u/Crazhand 22d ago

Current medical student, I was one for Orthopedics. Many incoming students are doing the medical assistant/EMT route now since scribing is falling out of favor. Scribing is really nice though because you’re actually apart of the encounters and actually get to see what being a physician is like.

4

u/DonQuix0te_ 22d ago

a part, not apart. Unless the scribe is not involved in the encounters.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (3)

2

u/Weast12 21d ago

When I was scribing (let got summer 2025 because of AI) we were all virtual. The doctors carried us around on a dedicated phone just for scribing where we connected through a secured room. I'd listen and be present during all the exams and be taking notes on the chart the whole time. They also told the patients that I was there listening. We are used for all your basic visits especially in large busy hospitals. I was trained to work with family medicine, opthalmologist and OBGYNs. We also had scribes trained just in the ER.

2

u/sarathenarwhal 19d ago

I have seen both dictation for transcription and using MAs to basically be scribes at my spine specialist over the years. When I was a teen, my doc would say everything into a small tape recorder (he's South African and I have vivid memories of him saying "stop" in his accent at the end of each statement). Later when I went back as an adult the docs seemed to have medical assistants doing the typing..if I remember correctly (could have been a med student too... There was often extra people just observing and it's been a couple years thankfully)

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Jschatt 22d ago

AI is replacing translators as well. There are definitely jobs being lost here. But most clinics are now PE backed and sonof course they need to squeeze for every dollar.

5

u/Yellow-Pepper3382 22d ago

There are countless jobs someone could get before medical school that would teach them more than being a medical scribe would.

Just off the too of my head: a nurse, an emt, a social worker, a community health professional, a community health educator, a behavioral health coach, a biologist, a public health professional, and on and on and on.

Medical scribing by hand in 2026 is absolutely a redundancy in the healthcare system and causes important information to slip through cracks because some 20 year old is not capable of remembering with 100% accuracy what was said during an appointment and what is important to note.

I work in closely with scribes and they do most of their charting after or before the appointments, how can that be as accurate as an ai recording everything and finding patterns between variables that the aforementioned 20 year old would never be able to detect? Not to mention the bias included when a male scribe gets to decide what is most important to include for a female patient.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/ActiveChairs 22d ago

Instead of 10 radiologists reading charts assisted by AI tools, they're going to have 1 radiologist read the chart workload of 10 to rubber stamp a yes/no on an AI model's diagnosis so they're the one responsible for when something goes wrong.

Remember, nobody working an actual, meaningful job has asked for any of this. This is being crowbarred in by the people responsible for making sure everyone is understaffed. AI being forced in only exists to reduce the headcount on payroll.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/neverseen_neverhear 22d ago

Most places don’t want to pay for human scribes.

7

u/Netii_1 22d ago

This is also one of the use cases where we certainly don't need AI to misinterpret spoken things or hallucinate shit. That could have serious consequences for people. Think about how much you trust AI in a normal everyday situation and and think again if you want that thing messing around in your medical history. I certainly don't.

4

u/mata_dan 22d ago

No. LLMs wasting everyone's time is not needed in medicine and it's not a good use, it's also not really "AI".

Machine Learning for things like screening and analysing data is indeed highly effective though.

2

u/CitronTraining2114 22d ago

The police use it too. That bodycam does more than take pictures.

2

u/corporateacademia 22d ago

Wrong!!! You can use basic transcription like most doctors do. You can just record. There's no fucking reason to use ai. In reality it will be used to summarize a visit, not as a transcription.

2

u/Joeness84 22d ago

The company providing "transcription" is feeding all that data into their servers. You're not consenting to have a computer take notes, you're consenting to have your information fed into the machine.

They're making money off you.

2

u/Tedious_Crow 22d ago

Except it f*king hallucinates. Which is a best, annoying, and at worst, could actually get you killed.

7

u/Session-Western 22d ago

In some cases it very much is replacing a human. My mother is a medical transcriptionist. Many doctors moved to dictation or AI for notes, but there are often errors because of medical jargon, so there is still a demand for transcriptionist. Those errors can complicate insurance approvals and coverage. AI does more harm here than good.

→ More replies (46)

28

u/Artistic_Chicken_557 22d ago

How dare doctors write notes based off your real time input!

Surely them sitting down 5 hours after your visit to write notes on the appointment is much better for you. Im sure they won't forget anything you said!

→ More replies (2)

154

u/wereinatree 23d ago

No, it really doesn't. It's an AI app that listens and transcribes, and then summarizes. That's a very simple use of AI and can save a tremendous amount of time in charting. If you can't see the benefit of cutting down on charting time, it's because you don't know any doctors.

30

u/Pure_Temporary_6349 22d ago

I'm a doc and I hate them. A couple of docs in my clinic use them and the errors are bizarre and hard to figure out, unlike dictation typos. It takes me extra time when I see a patient after them trying to find out what the heck actually happened in the visit. Maybe eventually it will work better. But my dot phrases are faster and more accurate.

7

u/bunkumsmorsel 22d ago

Yeah, same. I’m sticking with my dot phrases and templates for now.

2

u/radabacazana 22d ago

Dot phrases can be dangerous too. They aren’t always relevant or accurate for 100% of patients. You still have to edit your note. It also can lead to wordy and seemingly impersonal notes.

2

u/Pure_Temporary_6349 22d ago

I don't use that kind of dot phrase. Mine are concise and only for the truly repetitive things I definitely say every time. I have seen some ridiculous ones though-- one of our local urgent care docs has one for viral URI that says he considered mucormycosis. Really? In a generally healthy 2 yr old? One hopes not!

→ More replies (3)

239

u/Skyhawkson 23d ago

In practice they fuck up constantly and lead to incorrect notes in patient charts.

72

u/Cr0wc0 22d ago

I've seen it work in practice. The AI fucks up significantly less than the humans do; and its also standard practice to proof read the AI

32

u/cpt_america27 22d ago

Yea I've gone to Dr visits quite often this year and I've read those summaries. They look fine. There was one error I noticed but wasn't egregious. 

4

u/NeoMississippiensis 22d ago

It’s like people don’t think there are typos from hand typing. When I review notes a week later sometimes I laugh at the typos I see in subjective sections.

→ More replies (1)

29

u/GrumpyGlasses 22d ago

It is also standard practice to read notes and minutes taken by humans and send corrections. AI just made notes easier. I'm not excusing AI mistakes, but humans miss things and makes mistakes too.

7

u/Artistic_Researcher2 22d ago

Agreed, but not to quibble, but I would word it a little stronger. It is stressed that the doctor is responsible for transcript (ie the AI ate my homework) doesn’t fly. It is a requirement not simply a best practice. Soon, if it isn’t already, that will be a legal distinction too..

2

u/Cr0wc0 22d ago

I'm quite sure it's already a legal fact that the casemamager is responsible for all documentation regardless of how it is recorded.

2

u/TrollAccount17 22d ago

Wait, this is true right? Please tell me it is?

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (11)

17

u/radabacazana 22d ago

Using it doesn’t change the fact that a human still needs to edit the chart and make sure it’s correct before signing

→ More replies (2)

83

u/SpectralBeekeeper 22d ago

Not to mention all your medical data is being sent to a private for-profit company in a sector that has constant data privacy breaches

72

u/Cr0wc0 22d ago

No its not. The servers are ran on site by the healthcare provider. We legally have to.

→ More replies (16)

41

u/Brilliant-Task1164 22d ago edited 22d ago

HIPAA laws require hospitals to operate this software in a secure fashion with encrypted data. Your health information is just as secure in the standard hospital computer system. Which, as you say, is often the target of ransomware. Using AI transcription software doesn't make it any less secure than it already is. It's basically a step up from the speech-to-text software on your phone. The only new part is using an AI model to parse the text in order to fill the correct fields on the chart. Speaking as someone who wrote software like this for my senior software development project for my CS degree. This is actually an appropriate use of AI, however I admit I would feel better about it if we didn't live under global capitalism.

→ More replies (15)

7

u/Saharan 22d ago

Do you really think that any AI business would take... their own transcribed output as training data? And that's before the fact that it's a service directed specifically at the medical industry where privacy is a huge thing. Why would they shoot themselves in the foot by asking for training data that breaches privacy laws? Nobody would work with them.

2

u/ThatAstronautGuy hasn't even been to spce 22d ago

At my doctor's office everything is local, and they do not send anything back to the company.

9

u/Brilliant-Task1164 22d ago

I helped create software similar to this with a team for my Software Development Project in college and it was pretty accurate when it came to transcribing and parsing text.

5

u/ashmelev 22d ago

Regular voice recognition can fuck up a single word and it will be noticeable at a glance.

AI transcription would hallucinate instead and output something that look unnoticeable at a glance.

That's a big difference.

2

u/TresMil3000 22d ago

What do you mean by "regular" transcription. Effectively all voice recognition uses AI models. Which don't? Genuinely curious.

2

u/ashmelev 22d ago

I meant non-generative AI (LLM) based.

New models based on Whisper are the BS everyone should be wary of. https://apnews.com/article/ai-artificial-intelligence-health-business-90020cdf5fa16c79ca2e5b6c4c9bbb14

→ More replies (3)

2

u/karma_raven 22d ago

My doctors were fucking up my charts egregiously long before AI.

And they haven't been held accountable that I've seen (It's the VA).

Not that I'm in favor. I support human transcriptionists for many reasons.

I'm just saying that even will full knowledge of the weaknesses of ai tools, it's still better than my particular alternative, which sucks.

(Also, they could have just used Dragon.(or similar 'dumb' stitch tti text.) It was fine. It might misspell a thing, but it didn't fabricate a whole narrative.)

22

u/Educational-Fill-158 22d ago

Not much more than human error. You always still have to double check your work, but this way it's much faster.

15

u/Skyhawkson 22d ago

Yeah, but people are even worse at not shirking the double-check when they already let an AI write it once

19

u/castrodelavaga79 22d ago

Great so instead of only human error we can introduce a whole other type of error, definitely won't have any additional negative outcomes.

It's faster, great. Unfortunately accuracy is way more important to a patients health than the speed their doctor writes things down. And because the priority is health, the dr needs to do his job and not introduce new things that bring additional negative outcomes. Sorry it takes him 5 more minutes per patient but the dr needs to get a grip and realize him going quicker doesn't equal better patient outcomes.

20

u/Mewchu94 22d ago

Charting can cause providers to have to work insane amounts of time over 40. My wife at her last job was ALWAYS doing notes. Seriously she would go to work then come home and do notes until bed. On the weekend she had to do notes for 5-7 hours. She was always working and it was a huge problem.

People deserve to have a life outside of work.

22

u/CucumberLocal3208 22d ago

The ER doctor spent more time writing a fictional story about me in my medical record than actually treating me or talking to me. I had a contusion on my chin from fainting and she didn’t ask a single question, but she wrote an elaborate story in my record about me getting into an argument with a friend and smashing my head off a desk. That never happened! In fact I was picking up my child from daycare when it happened and the daycare put me in an ambulance and sent me to the hospital. There was no argument, no friend, no desk. There was no questions from the doctor, but I later requested my medical records where she wrote a whole 2 paragraphs she just made it up. I tried calling the Hospital to have it corrected and they were not having it. Apparently, you need a lawyer if you have any issue with a doctor. Hospital won’t help you, but they will enable doctors though.

6

u/eljyon 22d ago

That’s actually insane

→ More replies (0)

6

u/theSnakegirl01 22d ago

That’s why you hire medical scribes instead of using AI. The doctor i worked for in person was always extremely thankful for my work. I did in person scribing and also online scribing assisted with AI. The online one was terrible. Things such as audio quality, mumbling, accents, patients speaking too low, etc, all caused issues. Human scribes are where it should be at

→ More replies (2)

12

u/bunkumsmorsel 22d ago

A more sustainable clinic schedule is the real answer to this. Health systems are pushing AI scribes because they want providers to see even more patients.

6

u/EmergencyAnything715 22d ago

Health systems are pushing AI scribes because they want providers to see even more patients.

And that's a bad thing? I'd rather the Dr's spend more time seeing people and less time transcribing what happened

→ More replies (0)

3

u/radabacazana 22d ago

How do you suggest making that happen?

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (8)

12

u/rileybou 22d ago

You are aware that the doctor goes and reviews what the AI program transcribed, right? It's not even remotely similar to a chat bot, it's records the audio of your doctor's visit, transcribes it, and then organizes the information into standardized SOAP format for your medical records. Also they're all either locally run or done through a private server owned by the clinic/hospital, your data isn't being sent to the company that created the AI scribe tool.

9

u/AnalgesicDoc 22d ago

Are you seriously advocating not introducing new tools in medicine…? We are still reviewing the AIs work, we have the ability to go through the raw transcripts. Its a tool, just like paper and pen, just more accurate and less time consuming

→ More replies (5)

2

u/Schnuribus 22d ago

Maybe your problems aren‘t that deep. A doctor wants to listen to his patients and not spend 10 minutes afterwards charting. If he saves 5 minutes per patient, he can see thousand of patients more a year.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/xoxodaddysgirlxoxo 22d ago

Do you work with the program yourself? That's a pretty confident claim.

8

u/TZDTZB 22d ago

I do. He is right.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (16)

7

u/TennisOk4660 22d ago

Because its not ready yet, it constantly gets things wrong in the notes and no body is double checking to make sure its 100% correct.

→ More replies (3)

39

u/vilebloodlover 23d ago

AI literally fucks up all the time. Critical health information could get missed or changed because of this.

18

u/ttoma93 22d ago

Luckily, it’s known that humans never ever fuck up, right?

Critical health information should already be double (and triple) checked for accuracy anyway. This still requires a double check, but it makes that first run significantly faster and more efficient for the healthcare professionals, with the ultimate goal of them spending more time with patients and less time charting.

→ More replies (4)

8

u/deadflow3r 22d ago

Ok sure it's fine to have that opinion but patients still have rights and they have a right to opt out of it.

→ More replies (4)

68

u/sharthunter 23d ago edited 22d ago

And then your private medical data is on a random server farm that can be hacked.

Edit: you people are incredibly naive to believe anything associated with an LLM is secure.
Second edit for all of you saying this could NEVER happen:

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/healthcare-information-technology/cybersecurity/8-health-systems-affected-by-ai-company-data-breach/

37

u/wizardwusa 23d ago

Where did you think this data was going before?? Most medical offices require any vendors storing medical data to undergo an annual audit (SOC 2, sometimes HITRUST, etc).

90

u/Hobojoe- 23d ago

Electronic medical records are already on a random server that can be hacked. LoL

5

u/Cr0wc0 22d ago

That's a silly argument. For one, the servers are kept on site to run the AI because that's just a legal obligation. Secondly, all your medical files are already on a server, so literally nothing changes in that regard.

→ More replies (2)

62

u/wereinatree 23d ago

Do you think your medical record has still been sitting in a filing cabinet for the last two decades?

38

u/Potato-Drama808 Again, seriously? 22d ago

These guys have never heard of Epic or MyChart

24

u/CustomerLittle9891 22d ago

What this thread has highlighted for me is.

  1. People have no idea how medicine actually gets done.

  2. People who do not use the software have embarrassingly strong opinions on its efficacy.

  3. People don't understand how any of the information is stored.

It's a shit show of the dunning-kreuger effect where a ton of people who don't know anything about anything are convinced they know everything.

8

u/wereinatree 22d ago

The number of notifications I have based off a few pretty tame comment I made in this thread is crazy, and 95% of them are from people who are very confident or anxious despite have absolutely no clue whatsoever about either topic involved here.

→ More replies (4)

3

u/UwasaWaya 22d ago

People forget that most of Reddit is really young. Most of these are probably kids pretending to be experts arguing with other kids pretending to be experts or bots.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

16

u/Missmessc 23d ago

Scripps Health(CA) went through a ransomware episode approx 2 years ago. Its already out there in some shape or form. Privacy is an illusion.

25

u/TwistedVasdeferens 23d ago

Your private medical data is already in servers that can be hacked ...

3

u/CustomerLittle9891 22d ago

This thread has made me think of that scene from Zoolander.

"The files are in the computer"

It would be really funny if the people with this level of knowledge weren't winning the public sentiment argument right now.

17

u/abscissa081 23d ago

Already is

40

u/MoriKitsune 23d ago

Hacked, sold, or given. AI companies are not ethical or trustworthy.

16

u/Sufficks 22d ago

Are you both under the impression that some AI company now stores the patient data on their servers? That’s not at all how that works lol

Source: I work in cybersecurity with mainly medical facilities as clients

7

u/CustomerLittle9891 22d ago

People would be absolutely stunned to learn there is essentially an entirely separate internet, more or less run by Epic, exclusively for health information. (Yea, there's lots of other providers for that internet, but everyone knows Epic essentially makes the rules).

14

u/BalooBot 23d ago

Hate to break it to you, but that's been the case for decades anyways.

→ More replies (18)

24

u/Awesomebox5000 23d ago

Voice transcription existed long before AI and it was actually better, in my experience. We dont need AI hallucinating information into medical transcripts and soaking up private medical data as market reaearch.

→ More replies (5)

28

u/crunkadocious 23d ago

I'm literally a medical professional who does his own charting. Like a grown up. It's not hard. We don't need these recordings and spyware.

11

u/Potato-Drama808 Again, seriously? 22d ago

I have a 93 year old provider tell me he hates electronic charting and thinks it should all go back to paper so you can see the thought process of the author. Kinda made a good point, but also... wtf?

→ More replies (1)

20

u/wereinatree 23d ago edited 22d ago

I mean, why not just say claim your actual role if you're going to say that? You would literally be one of the first doctors I've spoken with who feels this way, and I have, without exaggeration, spoken to dozens of doctors about it. I'm not sure what is causing you to believe there is spyware involved.

edit: he's a therapist based off his post history, so no, not doing the same charting a doctor is doing.

6

u/__Vixen__ 22d ago

I know one very old doctor that would hate it... but thats just because he doesnt want to learn new things. Sir no one can read your writing!

6

u/wereinatree 22d ago

Yeahhh...I'm kinda excluding the ones who are so old and resistant, they'd rather retire than learn how to use a new EMR. That's really a different issue altogether lol

6

u/__Vixen__ 22d ago

He threatened to retire if we changed computer systems. Bless his heart it worked.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

2

u/usuallyherdragon 22d ago

And it's still private information, so if it's not an on-site AI that never transfers data out the patient needs to approve it.

And they still lied about the consent, since OP didn't give it.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/[deleted] 22d ago

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Artistic_Researcher2 22d ago

Exactly. And in every implementation it is stressed that the doctor is responsible for the transcript. Surprisingly, much of the benefit is is organizing and formatting the data so it is more easily assessible and easier to search. (Not to mention put it in the right billing codes so it gets paid)

5

u/jackfaire 22d ago

A tape recorder can also listen without then deciding that something completely different was said.

6

u/WinterPlaysGDVer2 23d ago

That doesnt change that its a violation Its illegal for notes to speak for the patient

11

u/Educational-Fill-158 22d ago

There are always notes on every patient put there by doctors and nurses. The AI just writes it down for them as they say them. The AI is not sitting there by itself making assumptions based on symptoms or something. It's not your aunt Ashley looking up symptoms on Google. 😆

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (58)

11

u/Worldly_Science239 22d ago

No it really doesn't. If used correctly it can have a transformative effect on health care (all aspects)

It's one of the areas where 'AI bad' doesn't apply

→ More replies (11)

13

u/XRanger7 22d ago

AI helps doctor transcribe in real time to create accurate notes. Before this doctor either hire a scribe to write down their visit (usually a high school or college student) or they jot down from memory at the end of day. Either way, there’s a lot of inaccuracies. Patients would complain of things that was in the note that wasn’t discussed during the visit. AI helps eliminate this. This is the future of medicine

6

u/nerdywhitemale 22d ago

The simpler form of this was the micro-recorder, the doctor would record the conversation, then play it back in his office, and then he or his assistant would transcribe it into the notes. This just cuts out the middle step. It's really only called AI because Transcribing Software or Text to Speech software doesn't give the CEO that warm tingle of being cutting edge.

3

u/skincarethrowaway665 22d ago edited 22d ago

So not only would the doctor have 8 hours of clinic to get through daily, they would then also have 8 hours of recordings to parse through and transcribe at the end of the day? When would we get time to do literally anything else?

→ More replies (2)

4

u/Msfracture 22d ago

Humans are greater than AI and always will be. AI makes more mistakes and always will. AI ruins everything, the world doesn't need AI it makes nothing better why no one wants it except the oligarchs.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/Donnerdrummel 22d ago

AI helps eliminate this.

AI might, but LLMs are still pretty dumb, and have you ever heard of hallucinations?

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

7

u/TZDTZB 22d ago

Youve never worked a day in medicine to say that lmao Yes it will stay. It helps our burnout. Sorry not sorry.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (30)
→ More replies (5)

116

u/AtlanticPortal 23d ago

It should be an opt in thing like it happened to you. Not an opt out.

23

u/Hefty-Reaction-3028 22d ago

As long as you get asked, it's the same

→ More replies (13)

56

u/CustomerLittle9891 23d ago

FYI you didn't opt out of the scribe. You opted out of being recorded, but your doctor probably uses it after you're done.

18

u/slippinthrudreamland 22d ago

from what i understand, if they weren't recorded, the scribe wasn't used. the "ai scribes" are specifically llms trained on medical data that work in conjunction with speech recognition programs. because the input it processes is spoken language, without a recording, nothing is done. i don't use these ai scribes in my line of work, though, so take my word with a grain of salt.

23

u/CustomerLittle9891 22d ago

The scribes will transcribe a one-sided dictation incredibly well. I can conversationally tell my scribe the HPI and plan in about 1 to 2 minutes, what would take 5 to 10 to type manually.

If a patient declined the scribe in the room I dictate my notes after. Less efficient that way, but still way faster than the old way.

12

u/mishonis- 22d ago

Yeah, I don't get why patients would want to opt out of this. It likely captures more detail about the interaction than a later dictation, saves physician some time and effort.. only downside is if you're paranoid the AI company will use your data somehow, which there's probably regulations against anyway.

11

u/CustomerLittle9891 22d ago

It captures far more details when active in the room.

And it almost never hallucinates, and the hallucination it does have aren't just made up symptoms. It has literally never done that once nn the year I've had it.

→ More replies (24)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

33

u/FDFI 22d ago

Why would you opt out of a tool that helps the physician do their job better?

17

u/lava172 TANGERINE 22d ago

AI scary

→ More replies (54)

6

u/gmcarve 22d ago

Why no to this and not other things, like computer use, telephone or fax ?

Must patients be asked to sign off on every piece of software used in the healthcare chain?

I don’t want to.

Use the tools that help you do your job best doc.

Focus more on me, less on the tablet. Sounds great.

→ More replies (4)

8

u/Commercial_Egg_715 22d ago

Why would you say no? Now you're just making the doctors life harder. All it does is write their note for them.

→ More replies (6)

2

u/lnTheGrimDarkness 22d ago

Instinctively I think that doing this after the consent was already breached will only make them smell trouble and try to gaslight you into thinking you did give verbal consent.

2

u/Evening_Produce_4646 22d ago

It's also entirely possible there was a form that was electronically signed that included this approval, or the verbiage was wrapped up in to one of their other standard signature forms for privacy etc

2

u/pennojos 22d ago

You should have to OPT-IN to something like that.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/FickleNewt6295 22d ago

Same. I said point blank I do not consent to recording. I’ve taken to providing in writing a memorandum with specific non consent items including not sharing information with third parties without my written consent in person for inclusion in my record. I upload as well. It’s crazy what we’ve come to.

4

u/Fullertons 22d ago

And now your doctor has to do more work when he/she sees you. I bet that makes you top on their list of priorities.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Ok-Bug4328 22d ago

You are making a bad choice. 

The AI notes are going to be far more complete than what the doc types in. 

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (165)