4.6 Letter

The rise of artificial intelligence and the uncertain future for physicians

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
卷 48, 期 -, 页码 E13-E14

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejim.2017.06.017

关键词

Big data; Artificial intelligence; Precision medicine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Physicians in everyday clinical practice are under pressure to innovate faster than ever because of the rapid, exponential growth in healthcare data. Big data refers to extremely large data sets that cannot be analyzed or interpreted using traditional data processing methods. In fact, big data itself is meaningless, but processing it offers the promise of unlocking novel insights and accelerating breakthroughs in medicine-which in turn has the potential to transform current clinical practice. Physicians can analyze big data, but at present it requires a large amount of time and sophisticated analytic tools such as supercomputers. However, the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) in the era of big data could assist physicians in shortening processing times and improving the quality of patient care in clinical practice. This editorial provides a glimpse at the potential uses of AI technology in clinical practice and considers the possibility of AI replacing physicians, perhaps altogether. Physicians diagnose diseases based on personal medical histories, individual biomarkers, simple scores (e.g., CURB-65, MELD), and their physical examinations of individual patients. In contrast, AI can diagnose diseases based on a complex algorithm using hundreds of biomarkers, imaging results from millions of patients, aggregated published clinical research from PubMed, and thousands of physician's notes from electronic health records (EHRs). While AI could assist physicians in manyways, it is unlikely to replace physicians in the foreseeable future. Let us look at the emerging uses of AI in medicine. (c) 2017 European Federation of Internal Medicine. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据