|
|
|
|
|
by webel0
859 days ago
|
|
(Tangentially related to, “A WAY TO END CANCER”) After seeing how my doctor iteratively ordered up different sets of tests for me over the course of a few months, I got to thinking about improving decision trees for blood testing (and maybe others). However, when I spoke to a (first year) med student about this he suggested that doctors actually don’t want something like this. I don't think I followed the thought process completely but it was something along the lines of, “we’ll always find something.” Would be interested if someone could elaborate on this line of thinking. |
|
If they get results from a test, but without the compelling observation, they're then operating outside their well established statistical framework, and they can't confidently evaluate the meaningfulness of the test results.
To me, this doesn't mean the extra information is bad, or unhelpful, it's just they are not yet properly calibrated to use it properly.
I've heard this sentiment from medical professionals before and this was my conclusion.