Muhammad Umar explains why AI in medicine isn't heading toward autonomous robot doctors. Instead, specialized tools like Open Evidence, already used by two-thirds of American practitioners, outperform generic AI by training on curated medical evidence rather than the whole internet.
Chapters
So our news is next relating to the medical health tech in US as well. That medicine is becoming a software. It's not something new, but it's getting very efficiently day by day. US agencies are preparing the pathways for AI system that don't just assist doctors, but also make clinical decisions, including prescription as well. So at the same time, the medical AI models for the image diagnostic reporting are getting clear through the regulations of the medical as well. So are we very close to AI doctors prescribing medicines?
I think, I think, I mean it's an overhype about AI doctors. I mean currently, I mean, of course at some point we'll see AI doctors, but currently what's happening is these things, these regulated industries are dependent a lot on the data. So there's a company called Open Evidence in America. I think 2/3 of American practitioners are using Open Evidence. Think of it like it looks like Chat GPT. It is Chat GPT. Its interface is charged, but it works for the practitioners because it's trained on that very specific evidences. It's called open evidence, right? So think about Open evidence with let's say 3.5 capability is equivalent to chat GPT 10.10. The reason for that is very specific. Right? So currently when we think about healthcare, and by the way, in America we talked in one of our podcasts previously was like in us, rather than building first AI doctors, we need to think about how can we build capabilities like Open evidence, right?
