Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
I've got a similar (less serious) issue. Have done my back in and lost the feeling in my left leg.
Doctor: "We can't refer you for an MRI until you've had the problem for at least 8 weeks. Go home, take some painkillers and do some exercises"
Me: "That's exactly what they told my brother who is now crippled after red flag symptoms were ignored. F**k this, thank God I've got BUPA, now please give me a referral"
Me to, but get referral within an hour from video doctor
Outside of the UK, NHS trained GPs are quite highly valued. But delayed diagnosis is also an issue. My insurance allows me to go directly to specialists without referral.
Any loss of feeling due to back problems needs to be seen rather more expeditiously than 8 weeks, I would have thought. Or have did he spot your arms have fallen off?
He said it would be 8 weeks before they'd consider an MRI scan.
My brother had cauda equina syndrome that was left untreated for weeks until he finally got a GP to refer him to a specialist who immediately ordered an MRI.. He was on the operating table the next day and he's now permanently disabled.
This removes the need for expert staff and could be part of a health screening. Lets hope the Government get on to it.
It doesn't. AI while useful is not a panacea. In particular you wouldnt want to be one of the many false positives or false negatives that most ML models come up with.
Bottom of seven high-income countries: Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand and Norway being the others. Last time I looked there were around 200 countries in the world, so the headline description of it as a "global league table" is disingenuous clickbait at best
Here's the actual study, for those who'd like to have a stab at interpreting the significance of its findings themselves rather than relying on a journalist whose other recent headlines include "Coffee can help you lose weight, study finds" and "Eating breakfast to lose weight ‘could have the opposite effect’".
(And yes, I know the subs write the headlines, but still.)
This is one of several studies that shows that UK survival rates are not as good as those in comparable countries, especially Europe.
This is mainly due to later diagnosis.
It doesn't. AI while useful is not a panacea. In particular you wouldnt want to be one of the many false positives or false negatives that most ML models come up with.
As usual you are wrong, currently its as good at the task soon it will be better than a human, at least for lung cancer. With more scan data and training it will get better.
It was more effective than the radiologists when examining a single CT scan and was equally effective when doctors had multiple scans to go on. The results, in Nature Medicine, showed the AI could boost cancer detection by 5% while also cutting false-positives (people falsely diagnosed with cancer) by 11%.
so actually a machine is 5% less likely to miss cancer and 11% less likely to give a false positive. I suspect once it becomes mainstream it will be faster & cheaper. In which case you could probably do best of three in one go (multiple scans from different directions) which could then be followed by a human opinion. The more scans we take the better chance anyone has to detect it.
It won't come in hung over etc. So yes if it performs better in the lab its more likely to perform better in real life.
Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much.
This is one of several studies that shows that UK survival rates are not as good as those in comparable countries, especially Europe.
This is mainly due to later diagnosis.
so cheaper & faster early screening would help?
Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much.
I'm building deep learning models for medical diagnosis using various modalities of medical imaging. You?
While effective, we've probably hit the limit of what they can do. You still have to run biopsies and all other tests on flagged and unflagged patients who have symptoms.
Early screening using AI is being used, but the gains so far are marginal, because the bottleneck is in the testing. Screening just provides an indication of who to test and its not foolproof by any means.
It could help, if the rest of the process caught up with it.
Ai says you *might* have lung cancer.
Unlike other rich countries, NHS maybe can't make an appt within 60 days due to lack of staff to conduct biopsies etc.
This is what's happening at the mo.
How do I know? I'm working for a non-Uk pharma in the oncology therapy area.
Comment