About LLM. Does anybody remember using Open Evidence in the beginning? You could ask a question and get a response from the existing literature, with all its limitations - but still a fair response. Then after a while guidelines became pushed to the forefront of the response when looking for a conduct, bypassing whatever raw data you were looking for... I fear for the independence of LLM analysing data.
The argument about having a specialist and generalist's view on guideline editorials is great, preferably independent, with possibly a nuance between ressource rich and ressource poor settings (rural - urban centres).
“Guidelines are important, but they are not the definitive word on how to care for patients – that requires a discussion between patient and clinician – and what is best for that person.”
Was this your position during the pandemic??!! I think not.
I'd like to add one more point or might have a bit of a different opinion. I'm just a German generalist in my own bubble. I was part of some German guidelines but I by far do not have your expertise.
But: our guidelinesare far to long and they show a certiny in very smal questions, which nearly never really exists. Some of our guidelines are over 500 Page, have over 100 recommendations and over 1000 literature quotes. NOBODY ever read all even less critcal appraisal. And then reality is again totaly different and "in worst case" we might even have patients with their own will and having besides their body a soul and a social surrounding.
Men - even doctors - are simple. If we want to have everything perfect the result might be far to complex for a far to complex individual.
About LLM. Does anybody remember using Open Evidence in the beginning? You could ask a question and get a response from the existing literature, with all its limitations - but still a fair response. Then after a while guidelines became pushed to the forefront of the response when looking for a conduct, bypassing whatever raw data you were looking for... I fear for the independence of LLM analysing data.
The argument about having a specialist and generalist's view on guideline editorials is great, preferably independent, with possibly a nuance between ressource rich and ressource poor settings (rural - urban centres).
“Guidelines are important, but they are not the definitive word on how to care for patients – that requires a discussion between patient and clinician – and what is best for that person.”
Was this your position during the pandemic??!! I think not.
Dear Howard Bauchner,
I'd like to add one more point or might have a bit of a different opinion. I'm just a German generalist in my own bubble. I was part of some German guidelines but I by far do not have your expertise.
But: our guidelinesare far to long and they show a certiny in very smal questions, which nearly never really exists. Some of our guidelines are over 500 Page, have over 100 recommendations and over 1000 literature quotes. NOBODY ever read all even less critcal appraisal. And then reality is again totaly different and "in worst case" we might even have patients with their own will and having besides their body a soul and a social surrounding.
Men - even doctors - are simple. If we want to have everything perfect the result might be far to complex for a far to complex individual.