'Jeopardy' Computer Doesn't Belong in a Doctor's Office

on September 12, 2011 at 12:04 PM

jeopardy playing computer watson Remember Watson, the uber-brainy, IBM-created computer that appeared on Jeopardy last winter? He's got a new gig, and it could land him in hospitals and doctor's offices across the country. Turns out, health insurer WellPoint is pairing up with IBM to use Watson's technology in medical settings, the goal being that the computer will "help doctors with diagnoses and treatment suggestions." WellPoint says it's part of a broad push to involve "computerized guidance" in health care.

Initially, Watson will "work with nurses tasked with managing complicated patient cases," and then it'll "take to oncology practices." Eventually, patients will be able to tap into Watson via an app.

Sigh.

Not only is it insulting to docs and RNs for WellPoint to assume that after however many years of school and practice, they need something that sounds like a WebMD or Google University helping them do their jobs!

But a computer becoming something of a physician's assistant to patients is also terribly troublesome. I can't help but think of 2001: A Space Odyssey! I can just hear Watson now, doing it's best HAL impression: "I'm sorry, Dr. Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that."

Sure, there are definite pros to incorporating more technology into medicine. Screening processes that help with early detection of cancer -- awesome! Or robots that expedite the emergency room check-in process would be sweet. Perhaps tools that help track medical history? Sure, all of those applications make sense. But having a computer make suggestions when it comes to diagnoses and medicines?! That's so obviously a step in the WRONG direction.

We already have a significant problem with so many doctors being so crazy busy that they can barely spend five minutes with most patients! Sure, I've also had physicians who sat down with me and even drew diagrams to help me understand a diagnosis, but sadly, those docs seem to be fewer and further between. More often, you'll get a doc who's in and out, with whom you have to have your questions lined up and ready to fire if you want any further explanation. Can you just imagine a COMPUTER in that equation? Gah!

I don't care how smart Watson is. Having a computer involved in the two most crucial aspects of medicine (diagnosis and treatment) seems like nothing short of an insult to patients. Like all we really need is to be put in a room with an iPad that spits out a generic diagnosis and scripts. We need MORE human-to-human interaction -- not less.

What's more, additional "computerized guidance" in health care sets a dangerous precedent for people to be treated even less holistically, even less as individuals. Maybe it could be helpful for back-up support, but reliance on it seems like a horror movie brought to life.

What do you think about a computer diagnosing you and offering treatment suggestions?

Image via p_a_h/Flickr

About the author Maressa Brown

has enjoyed reporting and writing for a variety of entertainment and women's magazines and websites. More often than not, you'll find her blogging, reading, researching something on her iPhone, laughing, chatting at an above-"normal" volume, or getting her caffeine fix.

Filed Under: general health

Comments (15)

Nonmember comment from Corey

on Sep 12, 2011 at 12:15 PM

The thing is, if you think your doctors don't have 5 minutes to spend with you, do you think they have time to stay up on current medical trends and treatments? This computer will help with that...your doctor may be missing something important in your diagnosis that a computer may catch. It's simply a tool.

Report this comment

EBee12

on Sep 12, 2011 at 2:59 PM

You are obviously not a doctor nor someone involved in health care or technology. All diagnosis is a crap-shoot, I've had doctors tell me that. Yes, a doctor is a human and it's nice to think that this human can solve your problems, but the truth is, the doctor doesn't know about Joe Smith from Tiny Town USA who has the same symptoms you do and it took his doctors a year to figure out what was wrong with him. Wouldn't you rather have a fast and accurate diagnosis than a human one? Humans are fallible, very fallible.They are affected by sleep, hunger, time, family, car problems (you get my drift), a machine can work without this issues. Your doctor will NEVER be REPLACED by a machine, but bringing this type of technology into the healthy care system is exactly what the doctor ordered.

momkaribg

on Sep 12, 2011 at 3:49 PM

I think it could be a uesful tool to back up a doctor.

Nonmember comment from Vin

on Sep 12, 2011 at 4:00 PM

This sounds awesome! It won't be any closer to perfection is generating correct diagnoses than we are and it will probably be a lot faster at coming up with alternative theories about what a patient's medical problem is. If they combine it with one of those fully automated experiment system you could get a system that produced the diagnosis, ran tests on a sample, and updated its hypothesis afterwards with little human intervention (save what's necessary to avoid lawsuits, of course). I hear there's some research into using Watson in the legal field as well. Now that would really be a step up from what we currently have...

KamiB79

on Sep 12, 2011 at 5:58 PM

I don't know that I would care for this, but I think it could be a useful tool!

KristinRox

on Sep 13, 2011 at 5:05 PM

Nope. Not for me. I prefer a real true blue person to talk to me about my health issues. My body is my lifeline, and having a computer take care of it is not for me.