I like this idea. I also like how it is presented.
In this framework Alice’s expertise … is backed by her track record.
I think resting the approach on prediction is great but as stated (the doctor making the predictions) it forces doctors to be good at both. While I think that this is basically a good idea as mentioned here
In addition to giving the patient a more informed choice about the advantages of different treatment options this process helps the treatment provider to increase his skills. They learn about where they make errors in the estimation of treatment outcomes.
but in practice a solution would be needed to split the responsibilities otherwise you likely get mediocre estimates combined with mediocre treatment.
but in practice a solution would be needed to split the responsibilities otherwise you likely get mediocre estimates combined with mediocre treatment.
I don’t think the skill of predicting how likely pill A and pill B while cure the patient are independent of the skill of whether to recommend pill A or pill B to the patient. Training the skill of making the predictions should help with the skill of making treatment decisions.
In the proposed framework the treatment provider also isn’t completely alone at making the predictions. He makes the predictions over the website interface and the website has access to a lot of data on which it can run machine-learning algorithms. The website can help a treatment provider make better predictions than he would make otherwise.
It always worth saying that while the average treatment provider might combine mediocre estimates with mediocre treatments, there likely will be treatment providers who combine good estimates with good treatment. This framework means we would know the identity of those people. They could charge more money for their services and get status.
Their colleagues would try to replicate their skills.
They might write a book about the topic and their colleagues would devour it to learn their insights. Companies that develop new treatments would consult with those people to waste less money on developing treatments that don’t work.
I like this idea. I also like how it is presented.
I think resting the approach on prediction is great but as stated (the doctor making the predictions) it forces doctors to be good at both. While I think that this is basically a good idea as mentioned here
but in practice a solution would be needed to split the responsibilities otherwise you likely get mediocre estimates combined with mediocre treatment.
I don’t think the skill of predicting how likely pill A and pill B while cure the patient are independent of the skill of whether to recommend pill A or pill B to the patient. Training the skill of making the predictions should help with the skill of making treatment decisions.
In the proposed framework the treatment provider also isn’t completely alone at making the predictions. He makes the predictions over the website interface and the website has access to a lot of data on which it can run machine-learning algorithms. The website can help a treatment provider make better predictions than he would make otherwise.
It always worth saying that while the average treatment provider might combine mediocre estimates with mediocre treatments, there likely will be treatment providers who combine good estimates with good treatment. This framework means we would know the identity of those people. They could charge more money for their services and get status. Their colleagues would try to replicate their skills.
They might write a book about the topic and their colleagues would devour it to learn their insights. Companies that develop new treatments would consult with those people to waste less money on developing treatments that don’t work.