Slashdot Mirror


Giving the Humble Stethoscope an AI Upgrade Could Save Millions of Kids (ieee.org)

the_newsbeagle writes: The stethoscope is a ubiquitous medical tool that has barely changed since it was invented in the early 1800s. But now a team of engineers, doctors, and public health researchers have come together to reinvent the tool using adaptive acoustics and AI. Their motivation is this statistic: Every year, nearly 1 million kids die of pneumonia around the world, with most deaths in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. The death toll is highest among children under the age of 5. The researchers, from Johns Hopkins University, designed a smart stethoscope for use by unskilled workers in noisy medical clinics. It uses a dynamic audio filtering system to remove ambient noise and distracting body sounds while not interfering with the subtle sounds from the lungs. And it uses AI to analyze the cleaned-up signal and provide a diagnosis.

82 comments

  1. Why would it need to change? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    I've noticed that doctors barely use the thing anymore except for its symbolic value. Put on prominent display, it signals "look out, I went to medical school!"

    I've even had one arrogant turd of a doctor have a highly polished untouched stethoscope on display on his desk... unused.

    1. Re:Why would it need to change? by PPH · · Score: 4, Funny

      untouched stethoscope on display on his desk

      Of course the one he actually uses he keeps stored in the refrigerator.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:Why would it need to change? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      From what I've seen of doctors, they store it in their ass, next to their head.

    3. Re:Why would it need to change? by rtb61 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      If you are sending a child to an unskilled worker in a noisy medical clinic, chance that a better far more expensive stethoscope will fix the problem, well, fucking less than zero. See problem right fucking there, 'UNSKILLED WORKER', a bloody witch doctor would be better than sending them to an unskilled worker, who can diagnose one thing and one thing only with a better stethoscope, any other condition and you are fucked.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    4. Re:Why would it need to change? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cdreimer left /. after 20+ years and posted 100+ videos in 2018. His trolls are still butthurt about this.

      The thing to do for him: post more videos :)

    5. Re: Why would it need to change? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Laughed out loud at the comment about storing the stethoscope in the refrigerator

    6. Re:Why would it need to change? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My doctor uses it all over my chest, back, and abdomen during my yearly physical. I'm either asked to lie still or take slow long steady breaths.

    7. Re:Why would it need to change? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In 'civilized' lands it is called placebo.

  2. My AI's AI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    has an AI for an AI.
    We are no fucking closer to AI than any of you turds are to Milla Jovovich.

    1. Re: My AI's AI by Seewhatidonehere · · Score: 1

      You are a plague to this planet, wanting your fucking AI to rule over the world. However. 1. Cramming a microphone into a stethoscope to alleviate unwanted noise is far from AI. My earphones can do it. Of course only when they are powered by extra battery. 2. Creating 100 dollar price equipment to replace a 5 dollar one will not save more people. 3. To alleviate outside noise, just need a quiet room. 4. When we will build AI, the stethoscope will become immediately obsolete in comparison with the handheld star trek tricorder.

    2. Re: My AI's AI by Seewhatidonehere · · Score: 1

      Oh and the million kids die becouse they dont get the necessary medication and clean water to swallow it with and solid food to eat so they would get better.

    3. Re:My AI's AI by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Yo, dawg..

    4. Re: My AI's AI by Seewhatidonehere · · Score: 1

      Wake the fuck up kid and smell the coffee. Your hand is hanging into your pissbowl. Build a starship into that fucking stethoscope it still wont save millions of kids without alleviating the reasons causing them pneumonia in the first place.

    5. Re:My AI's AI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love how you parade as a Senior Editor for an online media outlet and yet you suffer greatly from a massive lack of spelling, grammar and critical thinking. It really brings tears to my eyes that this is the direction that /. has taken and journalism as a whole. You are self entitled and are no better at regurgitating mcdonalds than you are at news stories.

      The fact that you replied to my, or any at all, comment in the way you did speaks volumes about the type of person that you really are. I suspect the basement dwellers runs deep with this one.

      How's that for imagination?

    6. Re: My AI's AI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The difference is that we're at least on the same planet with Milla Jovovich.

    7. Re: My AI's AI by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      "You are a plague to this planet, wanting your fucking AI to rule over the world. "

      Humans are doing a shit job.

      "Cramming a microphone into a stethoscope to alleviate unwanted noise is far from AI. My earphones can do it. Of course only when they are powered by extra battery."

      That's not the clever part.

      "Creating 100 dollar price equipment to replace a 5 dollar one will not save more people."

      It also replaces the physician.

      Granted, it only replaces them for the one task, but there are other technologies which replace them for other tasks. And as it turns out, a doctor with advanced aids to diagnosis is better than either a computer or a doctor alone.

      " To alleviate outside noise, just need a quiet room."

      There's no such thing in a busy disaster shelter, or on the side of the road, or in a war zone.

      "When we will build AI, the stethoscope will become immediately obsolete in comparison with the handheld star trek tricorder."

      Tricorders require additional sensor technology, not just signal processing. Also, we may never build real AI, or it may make US obsolete.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re: My AI's AI by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      The difference is that we're at least on the same planet with Milla Jovovich.

      Not knowing whothe good Ms. Jovovich is I googled her name. Well now! It's a good thing I'm not hooked to the Brainwaves to speech machine in the last article, or my wife would be wondering about the dialog coming from my office.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  3. Definitely needed by 110010001000 · · Score: 1, Funny

    The main reason kids in impoverished nations are dying of pneumonia is the lack of electronic AI stethoscopes. Hopefully these guys have a startup and start shipping soon.

    1. Re:Definitely needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I certainly hope they will 3D print them from privately mined asteroids.

    2. Re:Definitely needed by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      You're being sarcastic, right? It probably takes, what, maybe half an hour on the outside to teach someone the basics of using a stethoscope, being a very simple device with no moving parts, needs no power, and is very durable, and most of all, very very cheap to produce? Not everything needs a gods-be-damned AI in it.

    3. Re:Definitely needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're being sarcastic, right? It probably takes, what, maybe half an hour on the outside to teach someone the basics of using a stethoscope, being a very simple device with no moving parts, needs no power, and is very durable, and most of all, very very cheap to produce? Not everything needs a gods-be-damned AI in it.

      And now I hope YOU are the one being sarcastic. Yeah, I get the if-it-works-don't-fix-it theory, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't look to at least improve that device, especially if that 200-year old design is proving to not be as effective in detecting disease in challenging environments. Case in point that is almost exactly the same as this are noise-cancelling headphones, which probably were also designed with some kind of "gods-be-damned" technology that simply wasn't marketed as "AI" at the time.

      The entire point of advancing the human race, is actual advancement. If we can build a better device to help save lives, then we probably should at least consider it.

    4. Re:Definitely needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what if they added blockchain support and cloud connection, could they rescue even more children? I suppose the monthly subscription model would also suit millennial generation of doctors even better.

    5. Re: Definitely needed by Seewhatidonehere · · Score: 1

      Its like the japanese self flushing singing toilet. Advancement at its brightest, usefullness at its best, been around for ten years and never sold much.

    6. Re:Definitely needed by turp182 · · Score: 1

      Regarding pricing, medically approved scopes start at over $100 (in the US). There are cheaper ones available.

      Half an hour would be plenty of time for someone to learn how to hear a living person's heart beat. Verify life (scope is needed for that).

      But what heart murmurs? I had one as a kid and I have a cat that has a different one (various levels and variants, for mamals).

      What about identifying irregular heart activity?

      To actually treat someone via stethoscope analysis requires a lot of time and education.

      --
      BlameBillCosby.com
    7. Re:Definitely needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To get more millennial support, they would have to add a social media connection to these devices. Stethoscopes would tweet to each other to make sure that each owner treated the region-appropriate number of trans and cis patients.

    8. Re:Definitely needed by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      Hey ass-hole:

      "You wake up one morning to discover that your child is ill: His forehead feels hot to the touch, and his rapid breathing has a wheezing sound. You live in Malawi, where your health care options are few. When the local clinic opens, you wait for your turn with the solitary clinic worker. She’s not a doctor, but she’s been trained to identify and handle routine problems. "

      "She puts on a stethoscope and presses its chest piece against your son’s front and back to carefully listen to his lungs. Through the windows, open in the heat of the day, come the sounds of people talking, the thrum of a generator, and the roar of a moped on the main road. The health worker strains to hear. " https://spectrum.ieee.org/biom...

      This is not remotely the problem anywhere else. So in 3rd world countries were people who are not doctors treat people in noisy conditions, this would help.

      Do you fucking understand now. Take your fucking head out of your ass.

    9. Re: Definitely needed by Seewhatidonehere · · Score: 0

      Third worlders gonna third world

    10. Re:Definitely needed by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      You know what? WHATEVER. I think shit like this is just a solution in search of a problem, especially in poor countries that would be happy to get just plain old-fashioned stethoscopes and actual doctors. Everything has to get more complicated and more expensive because I'm sure the profit margin on a plain-old-stethoscope is small, so let's make some fancy thing that needs power and if it breaks you can't fix it so we can charge more and make more profit. Don't even pretend that isn't a major portion of the motivation behind things like this.

    11. Re:Definitely needed by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      The main reason kids in impoverished nations are dying of pneumonia is the lack of electronic AI stethoscopes. Hopefully these guys have a startup and start shipping soon.

      That and those things that remove water vapor and generate enough water for the whole village. We need to send those over as well.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    12. Re:Definitely needed by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      You're being sarcastic, right? It probably takes, what, maybe half an hour on the outside to teach someone the basics of using a stethoscope, being a very simple device with no moving parts, needs no power, and is very durable, and most of all, very very cheap to produce? Not everything needs a gods-be-damned AI in it.

      From what I can figure, this is just a stethoscope with a mic on thesensor side, and another mic on the other side to cancel out ambient noise. Okay.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    13. Re:Definitely needed by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      You know what? WHATEVER. I think shit like this is just a solution in search of a problem, especially in poor countries that would be happy to get just plain old-fashioned stethoscopes and actual doctors. Everything has to get more complicated and more expensive because I'm sure the profit margin on a plain-old-stethoscope is small, so let's make some fancy thing that needs power and if it breaks you can't fix it so we can charge more and make more profit. Don't even pretend that isn't a major portion of the motivation behind things like this.

      Sounds to me like a noise cancelling mic and amp. Technology that's been around for years. Even cynical old me sees that as a good thing.

      Even jaded old me couldn't resist saving children. I think it's kinda a genetic predisposition.

      Practical old me tells us we better figure out how to feed all of the children we save though.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  4. Hubble Stethoscope? by Lionfire · · Score: 3, Funny

    This article sounded a lot more interesting when I misread the title.

    1. Re:Hubble Stethoscope? by WankerWeasel · · Score: 1

      I too misread the title. Saw Hubble, thought "How would they point it at Earth?" and read on. Not til close to the end did I realize that's just the name.

    2. Re:Hubble Stethoscope? by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 1, Funny

      I read "Humble Stethoscope" but I imagined it coming bundled with a bunch of Steam games.

  5. Cool stuff by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is the stuff AI (or what passes for AI) can help solve- all sorts of fiddly problems that can benefit from the introduction of a "smart tool". I'm all for smarter gadgets and diagnostics that can help give regular/untrained people the ability to deal with various problems.

    I mean, HELLO, this is what computers are meant to do- to help us do things we couldn't otherwise do.

    Sure, maybe the wizards at the Mayo Clinic won't use it, but they aren't the target audience. I can see where this could be useful in all sorts of circumstances. On the battlefield, for one, but also in places where people trained to decipher the sounds heard through a stethoscope are far and few between.

    It's like the super-simple AEDs (Automated External Defibrillator) that you see in offices and stores- they're simple enough that almost anyone can use one to restart a heart. My office has one and looks pretty straightforward to use.

    Gadgets like a smarter stethoscope could help save some lives, and that's a good thing.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    1. Re: Cool stuff by Seewhatidonehere · · Score: 1

      Some. Yet the title clearly claims millions.

    2. Re:Cool stuff by pz · · Score: 1

      The summary takes a swipe at mature technology (the stethoscope) just because it is mature. Mature does not mean bad, nor ineffective. On the contrary, mature means "we have figured out all the ways to make this better." Stethoscopes are awesome instruments: they take no power, last indefinitely, and can be used to diagnose a wide range of diseases in skilled hands.

      Now the last part is the important one: in skilled hands. The proposed instrument is for unskilled hands to help diagnose disease where doctors are scarce. It will need batteries. It will need protection from theft. It will cost a bundle. It may have annual licensing fees. It will surely need an internet connection. Now, is that really something that a sub-Saharan nation will be able to afford in its remote clinics?

      Or would that same money be better put into training its workers as health care technicians specifically skilled to diagnose pneumonia through traditional stethoscopes? No licensing. Stethoscopes are dirt cheap. Once learned and continually exercised, the training doesn't go away, doesn't stop working, doesn't need batteries. Some of those trained workers would be inspired to become physicians. Those new physicians would help ameliorate the local shortage. Long term, that appears to be the far better choice.

      If I were in charge of a remote village and given the option of (a) getting a shiny new device with all of the strings mentioned above, or (b) having the brightest one of my residents trained on hearing the difference between healthy and diseased lungs, you can bet which option I'd take.

      Cool stuff, as the parent poster states, yes. Appropriate use of technology when a simpler, better solution exists? Perhaps not.

      Here's where this kind of technology is actually useful: in comparatively rich places (not sub-Saharan Africa) where there's an under-served population at the physician level, but there are still skilled health care workers. Like Western inner city clinics staffed by physician assistants. PAs can use these tools to augment their existing skills to help triage patients more efficiently and accurately, sending those who are in need of more advanced services to regional hospitals.

      But even then, such clinics are cost-sensitive, so pricing becomes an issue, and any company manufacturing a product that can affect the outcome of human health needs to carry substantial liability insurance. Those costs are reflected in the purchase price of such devices. I'm having a hard time thinking automated diagnostic machines are going to be inexpensive.

      If the proposal were to, instead, create a small, ultra-fast antibody-based device that would take the results of a throat swab or cough to look for evidence of standard bacterial or viral lung pathogens, now you're talking. That kind of solution has the potential for being inexpensive and globally applicable.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    3. Re:Cool stuff by swillden · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It will need batteries.

      Sure. Batteries are cheap.

      It will cost a bundle.

      There's no reason to expect this to be the case. It's a device specifically targeted at very poor regions of the world and there's nothing about it that requires expensive hardware. It requires a lot less hardware than is in the typical low-end smartphone that sells in India for $40.

      It may have annual licensing fees.

      How much do you want to bet me that it doesn't?

      It will surely need an internet connection.

      There is absolutely no reason for it to need an Internet connection.

      Or would that same money be better put into training its workers as health care technicians specifically skilled to diagnose pneumonia through traditional stethoscopes? No licensing. Stethoscopes are dirt cheap.

      But training is very expensive, and you're talking about very complex training.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    4. Re:Cool stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You clearly don't work in the medical device industry.

    5. Re:Cool stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My office has one and looks pretty straightforward to use.

      They are, but you might want to take CPR training, because that includes AED training.

    6. Re:Cool stuff by yarbo · · Score: 1

      AEDs don't restart hearts. A flatline rhythm, AKA asystole, is not a shockable rhythm. The AED will figure out if it's a shockable rhythm though, but it's important I ruin all medical shows and movies.

      AEDs are great if people know how to use them and know what else to do (check pulse, delegate someone to call 911), run chest compressions while someone else attaches pads, etc...

      You should take a class though, because you don't want to have to figure everything out for the first time during an emergency. You get hands on experience with a trainer and mannequins and learn to handle and recognize some other emergency situations.

    7. Re:Cool stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This "AI" upgrade won't to squat. It'll just make costlier instruments. These millions of kids are not diagnosed early because they aren't going to doctors often or early enough. AI isn't fixing that problem. Unskilled workers can only help if they have the equipment.

      More noise.

    8. Re: Cool stuff by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      Some. Yet the title clearly claims millions.

      What's your point?

      Out of billions, "some" could easily be "millions".

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    9. Re:Cool stuff by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      I find your arguments less than compelling.

      Is it a perfect solution? No.

      Is it likely to be a useful, cost-effective way to help the target audience? Yes, I think so.

      No one is saying that this is the end-all be-all solution to solve this problem, but it can help and I think it's obvious that it has a lot of potential. Just because it's not perfect or doesn't meet your ideal criteria isn't enough of a reason to not use it.

      I remember when people said the same about cellphones- "They're too expensive, not useful enough, you'd have to construct cell towers all over the entire country, they need batteries, there are already payphones everywhere..." etc etc etc.

      And yet most of us carry one every day and never think twice about it.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    10. Re:Cool stuff by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      AEDs don't restart hearts.

      You're correct, and that was my mistake. I should have said that it can help normalize an irregular heartbeat (or whatever term is accurate).

      As for training on them, I agree 100%. An emergency situation is not the best time to learn anything.

      I opened ours up at lunch one day and went through the manual- it looks very straightforward to use. I think most people could get the gist of it in a 15 or 20 minute session.

      It's a perfect example of a somewhat-smart gadget that can help save lives, even in relatively untrained hands. And that's why I think a "smart stethoscope" is a great idea too. There's no real downside to it that I can think of.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  6. WhoopeeShit by AndyKron · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And it will only cost ten times what a normal one would AND the yearly software license will be so affordable!

    1. Re: WhoopeeShit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you hate kids in Africa then.

    2. Re:WhoopeeShit by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      If it saves you needing to pay a doctor for their time then it's probably going to be worth it.

      Charities will buy them to give to staff.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re: WhoopeeShit by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 1

      On the contrary, we love them so much that we rather spend money on a doctor and an affordable stethoscope than on a stethoscope alone.

      --
      Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    4. Re: WhoopeeShit by jrumney · · Score: 1

      Have you priced stethoscopes recently?

    5. Re: WhoopeeShit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget this new stethoscope will be a line items on insurance claims, so your doctor will not be allowed to use it without pre-approval. It will also take ten years to get FDA approval.

      The humble thermometer could not have been invented in today's overly regulated, over litigious, over insured society.

  7. Similar product, different company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.resapphealth.com.au/resapp-reports-positive-preliminary-results-from-smartcough-c-2-study-for-diagnosis-of-childhood-respiratory-disease-using-cough-sounds/
    This company's trying to do the same with smartphone

  8. Took me a while to grok the subject line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Humble Stethoscope and Hubble Telescope looked a bit too similar for my coffee-lacking brain.

  9. Humble upgrade to humble stethoscope by codeButcher · · Score: 2

    All those years sine the 1800s and they haven't been able to upgrade it with a simple heating pad? I've had some stethoscopes on my chest and back that could give me pneumonia all on their own.

    --
    Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
    1. Re:Humble upgrade to humble stethoscope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All those years sine the 1800s and they haven't been able to upgrade it with a simple heating pad?

      Well, they thought about putting in a heating pad, but then they realized they would have to remove the compressor used to cool the pad, and doctors agreed it would be no fun to use them anymore...

  10. Let's play .... by houghi · · Score: 2

    ... bullshit bingo.

    It has "AI" and "for the children" in the subject, so we are starting strong today.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    1. Re:Let's play .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think "blockchain" has been mentioned too.

      BTW, I always heard this called "buzzword bingo", at least in the technical realm. Political stuff like "for the children" I agree should be called bullshit bingo.

  11. Depends on your pathology by DrYak · · Score: 2

    I've even had one arrogant turd of a doctor have a highly polished untouched stethoscope on display on his desk... unused.

    You know a stethoscope serves usually to listen, e.g. to your lungs or your heart.

    If you're constantly going to the doctor to pester him about this weird skin rash that you are regularily getting on your penis, the stethoscope will be of no use.

    (And about the polishing : we are supposed to rub it with disinfection before and after each single use. Of course, it's going to look pristine and polished.
    Or would you prefer if we used it to help you exchange every possible virus and bacteria among all patients coming to the practice ?!)

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re: Depends on your pathology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Talking about penises and then polishing has me.... confused.

  12. Not to rain on your parade by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    This would replace the doctor, not the stethoscope.
    He's the weak link.

  13. How to fix medical care by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    Send your doctors to medical school on merit.
    Graduate the best and only the best.
    Ensure anyone who wants to work in your nation as a medical doctor is a qualified professional.
    Everyone sits the same exams and has to pass the same exams to be approved.
    Stethoscope skills are part of the needed years of approved study.
    After years of hard work and study a doctor enters the profession.
    Review the work done by doctors and ensure peer review is done.

    The reason why that education is important is that not every condition is going to be the AI expected "pneumonia".
    Skill is needed to detect many other conditions and what the best treatment is.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re: How to fix medical care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is what we have currently. The reason people are dieing in the ED waiting room is because we accept only the best. We need to start accepting the good enough. Better to be seen by an OK doctor right away rather than be seen by the best doctor in 6 months

    2. Re:How to fix medical care by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You have it completely backwards. The stethoscope won't have a bad day, it doesn't have ear wax, and it doesn't have to go to school. And the data will be produced through analysis, and it will have heard more conditions than any doctor. Doctors expect pneumonia. Computers don't. They process signals and match patterns.

      In the future, doctors may be rare, and involved in only the very strangest and most complex cases, while nurses with advanced diagnostic equipment handle the routine stuff. And the computers will learn from the doctors, and health care will improve as a result.

      As for the beginning of your comment, there is a world-wide shortage of doctors at the moment. I don't know how it works in other countries, but in this one the AMA has made it difficult to become one in a lot of irrelevant ways, which is to say they don't improve overall quality. Washing someone out because they don't perform well in an ER environment when they might be a perfectly good practitioner in other contexts, for example. Not every doc needs to work in the ER. We cannot survive your plan.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re: How to fix medical care by kenh · · Score: 2

      We need to start accepting the good enough. Better to be seen by an OK doctor right away rather than be seen by the best doctor in 6 months

      Do you know what they call the student at the bottom of the class in medical school? Doctor.

      I am not aware of this being an actual alternative for anyone, most people have access to exactly one doctor, the one that is close to their house and accepts their insurance...

      --
      Ken
    4. Re:How to fix medical care by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Re "they don't perform well in an ER environment"
      Why should any nation have to accept doctors who cant learn and who cant study?
      Why could not see a very different set of people everyday in the ER and put their education to some use?
      Thats the way that sorts out the professionals. Peer review and constant education and learning.
      The good quality doctors can do all that. People who cant need to look for another profession.
      A nurses with advanced diagnostic equipment is not a doctor.
      That is a way to sort people entering a hospital and to get some basic information ready for the medical experts.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  14. AI Doesn't Exist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Listen, there is no such thing as artificial intelligence. There are only computers that do what they are programmed to do. They do not think for themselves. They might be programmed to emulate thought, but it is not real thought.

    Can we please stop calling literally EVERYTHING with a computer in it Artificially Intelligent? It's an insult to intelligence everywhere.

    1. Re:AI Doesn't Exist by kenh · · Score: 1

      My HAL9000 would disagree with you!

      --
      Ken
  15. Hi Everybody! I'm Doctor Nick! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I do not want my medical needs attended to by "unskilled workers."

    But, we need to get ready for 'Medicare for All' under AOC's socialist utopia, so plan to get accustomed to substandard medical care by "unskilled workers."

    1. Re:Hi Everybody! I'm Doctor Nick! by kenh · · Score: 1

      "Unskilled worker" in this context means anyone that hasn't gone to medical school.

      As for the Democrat plan in the US to "outlaw" private healthcare so everyone has equal access to substandard care is a non-starter. Supporters argue that they have finally figured out a way to provide quality healthcare for all at an affordable price in a timely manner, but they can't explain why no other socialized medical care plan on the planet has achieved that goal. Every time you point to a fundamental flaw they claim "well, we will make sure that doesn't happen, but when you ask how, all you get is crickets...

      It's a grand idea, but medical care is expensive in terms of manpower and resources, and expanding access does not reduce the need for either.

      AOC actually claimed that the US would save money on funerals with improved access to healthcare... Apparently, in her mind people with universal healthcare coverage are immortal, since they won't have a funeral. (Delaying a funeral isn't a savings, it's a deferral - nothing more.)

      --
      Ken
  16. What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The diagnosis can't save the millions of kids. How will diagnosing the children actually CURE them? I'm sure there are more issues at play for saving lives in sub-Saharan Africa than a lack of AI stethoscopes.

    1. Re:What? by kenh · · Score: 1

      I'm sure there are more issues at play for saving lives in sub-Saharan Africa than a lack of AI stethoscopes.

      Well, we know they also need One Laptop Per Child and balloon-based Internet...

      --
      Ken
  17. ok.... by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    ....it's not a bad idea to upgrade the concept of stethoscopes, but I think there's still a value in the basic tool that is (essentially) impervious to damage, climate, immersion, AND DOESN'T NEED A BATTERY. *Particularly* in that undeveloped remote-care situation they envisage in the OP.

    --
    -Styopa
  18. AI needed to combat a noisy clinic? by kenh · · Score: 1

    with most deaths in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. The death toll is highest among children under the age of 5. The researchers, from Johns Hopkins University, designed a smart stethoscope for use by unskilled workers in noisy medical clinics.

    Did anyone consider the possibility of simply examining children in quiet rooms before they decided to throw a few million dollars in research funds for a ten thousand dollar "pneumonia detector" to be deployed in some of the most impoverished locations in the world? I bet the local practitioners could think of better uses for thousands of dollars than a battery-operated tool to replace a $5 stethoscope... like vaccines, a refrigerator, etc...

    --
    Ken
    1. Re:AI needed to combat a noisy clinic? by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      Come on that's way to obvious of a solution. Don't you know we're suppose to throw tech at a problem with a simple solution.

  19. AI AI AI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I applaud the use of technology to improve a device to diagnose disease, especially those is vulnerable children. However, this use of the term "AI" in everything technologically advanced has to stop. The "AI" is nothing more than advanced algorithms designed by competent programmers. We are no closer to "AI" today than we were 50 years ago. Please stop referring to technology as AI ... it is not.

  20. Idiots of the world unite... by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

    Really? Yeah because an AI stethoscope won't be expensive and will be easy to service in sub-Saharan Africa. Did you read the bit about "developing strategies for countries with limited resources" or was your head up your ass because you're a fucking engineer who's never been to sub-Saharan Africa. FYI given the many illnesses that plague people living in sub-Saharan Africa broad spectrum antibiotics would be the right treatment. But hey what do doctors know compared to IEEE engineers who have never treated anyone in sub-Saharan Africa. Fucking morons.

    "Given the global burden of these respiratory ailments, the World Health Organization has developed strategies for countries with limited resources. The guidelines for pneumonia [PDF] diagnosis minimize dependence on any technological tools, and instead rely solely on observed symptoms of shortness of breath, cough, and rapid breathing. In hopes of saving lives, the WHO recommends antibiotic treatment for all children with these symptoms, with the result that half the children who get treated for pneumonia don’t really have it. This approach puts unnecessary costs on communities, and the unnecessary medication contributes to the growing problem of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

    We propose a technological solution that builds on the stethoscope, which has hardly changed since its invention in the early 1800s."

    "Today’s electronic stethoscopes typically cost around US $500, making them far too expensive for many health workers in the developing world. The Johns Hopkins smart scope is designed to be significantly cheaper, with affordable electronic components and low-cost power and computing options, in hopes that it can be useful for low-resource communities."

  21. Dependency Inversion by holophrastic · · Score: 1

    No food, no water, no medicine, no doctors, no "quiet please, I'm diagnosing your dying child". So the solution is to replace the most reliable medical tool in the entire industry, a solid device that can be thrown around and has zero dependencies other than the patient, and someone to wield it, and we're going to replace it with a computer.

    May I remind you:

    No food, no water, no medicine, no doctors, no quiet, no electricity, no tech support.

  22. Practicality Concerns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My concern is targeting "noisy clinics... in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia...".

    Certainly if they can do this, and even if it takes off but not in Lesser Developed Countries, that's still a win. However in poorer parts of the world, practicality is paramount. If this device is expensive then it won't gain acceptance in LDC. If it has a big box of attached electronics, that's just inconvenient and something to break. If it requires charging, well that's possible but it creates a barrier (current stethoscopes aren't electrical at all).

    Stethoscopes have durable success because they are relatively simple, they do something important, they are cheap, and they can be cleaned. I gotta say, an AI powered stethoscope sounds like it is abandoning some of the success factors that made stethoscopes important.

    Stethoscopes are one of those rare items that is a universal symbol of Doctors world-wide, they are over a century old, and they don't offer a whole lot of opportunities to improve upon.