this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2025
43 points (97.8% liked)

Public Health

1081 readers
55 users here now

For issues concerning:

🩺 This community has a broader scope so please feel free to discuss. When it may not be clear, leave a comment talking about why something is important.

Related Communities

See the pinned post in the Medical Community Hub for links and descriptions. link (!medicine@lemmy.world)

Rules

Given the inherent intersection that these topics have with politics, we encourage thoughtful discussions while also adhering to the mander.xyz instance guidelines.

Try to focus on the scientific aspects and refrain from making overly partisan or inflammatory content

Our aim is to foster a respectful environment where we can delve into the scientific foundations of these topics. Thank you!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
otter@mander.xyz
otter@lemmy.ca
43
‘I'm choosing not to have it’: Some people are saying no to Dr’s using AI (www.abc.net.au)
submitted 1 month ago by throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to c/publichealth@mander.xyz
5 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Nearly one in four GPs nationally are believed to be using AI digital scribes for note-taking, according to the Australian Medical Association (AMA). Other practitioners, like psychologists and podiatrists, are also using the technology.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

FYI, a medical scribe is a job that a ton of people do. Not all doctors do their own transcription, or have their nursing staff do it. Often one that people looking at getting into medicine do for additional learning.

All the AI is going to do is misunderstand and hallucinate responses like they do with everything else. It's clear that the issues with LLM-based AI are above standard human error at this point.

There is no advantage here either than removing yet another person's job for a worse result.