- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
It’s not reliable. The name itself is misleading. The “evidence” is apparently already open. The article doesn’t seem to say whether the statistical model is open. My guess would be no.
More accurate name: ClosedSummary
When OpenEvidence took the US Medical Licensing Exam recently, it was wrong 9% of the time
The passing score for USMLE is ~200 out of 300… how many “wrong times” is that?
When we look at passing scores, is there any way to quantitatively grade them for magnitude?
Not all bad advice is created equal.
The grading is a mess. It goes about qualitative, quantitative… and statistical corrections “to make it fair”.
Anyway, there is ~30% margin on the scores for passing, so chances are that 9% is better than the worst doctor who still “passed”.
Article about an AI that aims to give treatment suggestions to doctors, with some alarming results.
