Registration form informs patients that if they do not wish AI to be used, they will need their referring doctor to refer them to a different service provider
frankly, anything that allows the practitioner to focus more solely on the patient is a good thing.
Absolutely.
on device AI pull out relevant bits to populate a template.
As long as it’s on device (or local network, I’d be fine with a e.g. a server for a practice, but say a macbook pro should do the job fine, with full disclosure to patients) it’s OK. Indeed go ahead and use whatever voice transcription / processing you want e.g. whisper or QWEN LLM, don’t care as long as it’s local. The article however cites ‘Heidi health AI/ Microsoft’, and my policy for anything with AI in the title is ‘distrust unless verified’ especially wrt health data.
Admittedly I don’t know ‘Heidi health AI/ Microsoft’ from a box of nails, but Microsoft’s fingers in the pie spooks me immediately. Frankly no commercial AI presents as trustworthy enough for sensitive data in general and incoming IPOs are only going to make that worse as they desperately seek monetization.
deleted by creator
Absolutely.
As long as it’s on device (or local network, I’d be fine with a e.g. a server for a practice, but say a macbook pro should do the job fine, with full disclosure to patients) it’s OK. Indeed go ahead and use whatever voice transcription / processing you want e.g. whisper or QWEN LLM, don’t care as long as it’s local. The article however cites ‘Heidi health AI/ Microsoft’, and my policy for anything with AI in the title is ‘distrust unless verified’ especially wrt health data.
Admittedly I don’t know ‘Heidi health AI/ Microsoft’ from a box of nails, but Microsoft’s fingers in the pie spooks me immediately. Frankly no commercial AI presents as trustworthy enough for sensitive data in general and incoming IPOs are only going to make that worse as they desperately seek monetization.
deleted by creator