It often still is a good idea to have an approach for a possible second step for when the first step or steps are established. A lot of ifs and sometimes countries entirely skip kinds of technology like the landline phones in Africa and go to mobile phones directly since it was easier to establish. Maybe not-so-wealthy countries will see an entirely different kind of health care in 10 years than we know it now.
Countries with a GDP per capita of $5,000-$10,000 typically do have good medical care in private, but most of the population is excluded because of cost. If we give the doctors ML tools to increase bandwidth, then that should help the situation by increasing supply. Suppose we could 10x the bandwidth for routine scans. The cost should go down in private, public health capacity will go up, and overall more people should be able to access it.
That's true, but I don't see that as necessarily decisive. If 1 doctor and 1 engineer can achieve the bandwidth of 10 (more?) doctors on some specific scan, we're still talking about less intellectual capital and less training requirements overall.
Also I don't think we're talking about special hardware here. Couldn't we just have a software package produced by someone (university, company in a wealthier country) that is used by docs everywhere? Could be done without the need of a dedicated local engineer? Perhaps the WHO could approve certain software packages for universal use in very specific cases.