|
|
|
|
|
by coxmichael
1320 days ago
|
|
Both can be true, and greater systems of medical research and analysis don’t necessarily lead to greater on-the-ground treatment. As you’ve pointed out, access to those information systems is critical. I’d add the distribution of that information as well as the right economic incentives to participate in using that information. I’m not sure we’ve really got any one of those things right. Edit: adding a bit of humanity to the system, as the OP is hinting at, could very much be a part of the fix. |
|
Not really. You can't say "doctors have become less productive" without accounting for the value incumbent in the increased documentation effort.
> greater systems of medical research and analysis don’t necessarily lead to greater on-the-ground treatment.
Maybe not "necessarily", but in practice they do. Perhaps not in every incidence, but broadly the analysis results in better outcomes or else there would be no economic incentive to facilitate medical research ("the incentive is to sell more drugs!" <- insurance companies aren't going to pay for those drugs if they aren't proven to work).
> Edit: adding a bit of humanity to the system, as the OP is hinting at, could very much be a part of the fix.
That's not how I understand the OP, but I doubt anyone would object to "adding a bit of humanity" (abstractly) to healthcare unless it implies a reduction in empirical rigor.