The article mentions a system for diabetic retinopathy diagnosis that is certified and has liability coverage. It sounds like it's the only one where that occurs. For everything else, malpractice insurance explicitly excludes any AI assisted diagnosis.
But the equipment is operated by a person, and the diagnostic report has to be signed off by a person, who has a malpractice insurance policy for personal injury attorneys to go after.
The system is designed a nanny-state fashion: there's no way to release practitioners from liability in exchange for less expensive treatments. I doubt this will change until healthcare pricing hits an extremely expensive breaking point.
The article mentions a system for diabetic retinopathy diagnosis that is certified and has liability coverage. It sounds like it's the only one where that occurs. For everything else, malpractice insurance explicitly excludes any AI assisted diagnosis.
Malpractice insurance tends to exclude the diabetic retinopathy one too.. the vendor has to provide insurance.
But the equipment is operated by a person, and the diagnostic report has to be signed off by a person, who has a malpractice insurance policy for personal injury attorneys to go after.
The system is designed a nanny-state fashion: there's no way to release practitioners from liability in exchange for less expensive treatments. I doubt this will change until healthcare pricing hits an extremely expensive breaking point.