Quote Of The Year

Timeless Quotes - Sadly The Late Paul Shetler - "Its not Your Health Record it's a Government Record Of Your Health Information"

or

H. L. Mencken - "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

Thursday, December 05, 2024

I Have To Say This Is A Really Interesting Question! Glad My Career Is Pretty Much Done…

This popped up last week and posed a rather existential question!

The Observer Artificial intelligence (AI)

If AI can provide a better diagnosis than a doctor, what’s the prognosis for medics?

John Naughton

Studies in which ChatGPT outperformed scientists and GPs raise troubling questions for the future of professional work

Sun 1 Dec 2024 03.00 AEDT

AI means too many (different) things to too many people. We need better ways of talking – and thinking – about it. Cue, Drew Breunig, a gifted geek and cultural anthropologist, who has come up with a neat categorisation of the technology into three use cases: gods, interns and cogs.

“Gods”, in this sense, would be “super-intelligent, artificial entities that do things autonomously”. In other words, the AGI (artificial general intelligence) that OpenAI’s Sam Altman and his crowd are trying to build (at unconscionable expense), while at the same time warning that it could be an existential threat to humanity. AI gods are, Breunig says, the “human replacement use cases”. They require gigantic models and stupendous amounts of “compute”, water and electricity (not to mention the associated CO2 emissions).

“Interns” are “supervised co-pilots that collaborate with experts, focusing on grunt work”. In other words, things such as ChatGPT, Claude, Llama and similar large language models (LLMs). Their defining quality is that they are meant to be used and supervised by experts. They have a high tolerance for errors because the experts they are assisting are checking their output, preventing embarrassing mistakes from going further. They do the boring work: remembering documentation and navigating references, filling in the details after the broad strokes are defined, assisting with idea generation by acting as a dynamic sounding board and much more.

Finally, “cogs” are lowly machines that are optimised to perform a single task extremely well, usually as part of a pipeline or interface.

Interns are mostly what we have now; they represent AI as a technology that augments human capabilities and are already in widespread use in many industries and occupations. In that sense, they are the first generation of quasi-intelligent machines with which humans have had close cognitive interactions in work settings, and we’re beginning to learn interesting things about how well those human-machine partnerships work.

One area in which there are extravagant hopes for AI is healthcare. And with good reason. In 2018, for example, a collaboration between AI researchers at DeepMind and Moorfields eye hospital in London significantly speeded up the analysis of retinal scans to detect the symptoms of patients who needed urgent treatment. But in a way, though technically difficult, that was a no-brainer: machines can “read” scans incredibly quickly and pick out ones that need specialist diagnosis and treatment.

The study demonstrated doctors’ sometimes unwavering belief in a diagnosis they had made, even when ChatGPT suggested a better one

But what about the diagnostic process itself, though? Cue an intriguing US study published in October in the Journal of the American Medical Association, which reported a randomised clinical trial on whether ChatGPT could improve the diagnostic capabilities of 50 practising physicians. The ho-hum conclusion was that “the availability of an LLM to physicians as a diagnostic aid did not significantly improve clinical reasoning compared with conventional resources”. But there was a surprising kicker: ChatGPT on its own demonstrated higher performance than both physician groups (those with and without access to the machine).

Or, as the New York Times summarised it, “doctors who were given ChatGPT-4 along with conventional resources did only slightly better than doctors who did not have access to the bot. And, to the researchers’ surprise, ChatGPT alone outperformed the doctors.”

More interesting, though, were two other revelations: the experiment demonstrated doctors’ sometimes unwavering belief in a diagnosis they had made, even when ChatGPT suggested a better one; and it also suggested that at least some of the physicians didn’t really know how best to exploit the tool’s capabilities. Which in turn revealed what AI advocates such as Ethan Mollick have been saying for aeons: that effective “prompt engineering” – knowing what to ask an LLM to get the most out of it – is a subtle and poorly understood art.

Equally interesting is the effect that collaborating with an AI has on the humans involved in the partnership. Over at MIT, a researcher ran an experiment to see how well material scientists could do their job if they could use AI in their research.

The answer was that AI assistance really seems to work, as measured by the discovery of 44% more materials and a 39% increase in patent filings. This was accomplished by the AI doing more than half of the “idea generation” tasks, leaving the researchers to the business of evaluating model-produced candidate materials. So the AI did most of the “thinking”, while they were relegated to the more mundane chore of evaluating the practical feasibility of the ideas. And the result: the researchers experienced a sharp reduction in job satisfaction!

Interesting, n’est-ce pas? These researchers are high-flyers, not low-status operatives. But suddenly, collaborating with a smart machine made them feel like… well, cogs. And the moral? Be careful what you wish for.

Here is the link:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/30/if-ai-can-provide-a-better-diagnosis-than-a-doctor-whats-the-prognosis-for-medics

I will say, straight of the bat, I have no idea of the answer, but I do think the human touch from your kindly doctor is rather hard to replace!

David.

Wednesday, December 04, 2024

It Is Really Fun To Look Back And See What A Mess The myHR Was Five Years Ago. Seems Little Has Changed!

This appeared a bit over six years ago!

Hidden conflict: My Health Record boss privately giving advice to health firms

By Esther Han

November 15, 2018 — 12.00am

The chairman of the agency responsible for the bungled My Health Record rollout has been privately advising a global healthcare outsourcing company.

The Herald discovered the relationship between the UK based government contracting giant Serco and the Australian Digital Health Agency (ADHA) chairman Jim Birch after obtaining internal documents that detail the board members' conflicts of interest.

The revelation comes as federal Health Minister Greg Hunt was forced to extend the My Health Record opt out period after a compromise deal with the Senate crossbench and a last minute meltdown of the website left thousands of Australians struggling to meet the original deadline.

Since April 2016, Mr Birch has been ADHA chairman with oversight of the My Health Record system, which will automatically generate digital medical records for millions of Australians who do not opt out by the end of January.

The ADHA board's "Personal Interests Disclosures Register", released under Freedom of Information laws, shows Mr Birch began "providing strategy advice to Serco" in November 2017. The register is not publicly available.

After the Herald submitted questions last week on whether the relationship posed a conflict of interest, Mr Birch quit the Serco advisory role.

Serco has won a number of multi-billion dollar government contracts to privately run - and in some cases deliver healthcare in - some of Australia's prisons, hospitals and detention centres.

The ability of Serco to navigate the controversial area of digital health records would be invaluable to any future expansion plans, given its "global healthcare strategy".

A spokeswoman for Mr Hunt said all 10 board members had declared their interests.

"Board members do not have access to system operations and board members cannot be present while a matter is being considered at a board meeting in which the member has an interest," she said.

Lisa Parker, a public health ethics expert at University of Sydney, said the public had been asked to trust that the agency is acting in its best interests. She said it should make public any information relevant to that trust.

The original My Health Record opt out deadline was October 15, 2018.Credit: Alamy

"Some members of the public may select not to place their trust in board members who they perceive to have conflicts of interest," Dr Parker said.

"This does not mean that transparency is wrong, rather it means that allowing associations that give rise to real or perceived conflicts of interest threatens the viability of the potentially important resource that is the My Health Record."

More competing interests exposed

The register also shows Mr Birch knows the chief executive of health-tech startup Personify Care, Ken Saman, and has been giving him advice since August last year.

The software company recently released "Personify Connect", a product that provides hospitals with "seamless integration" of its original patient monitoring platform with My Health Record.

Despite being scheduled to speak at a "Personify Care breakfast seminar" later this year, Mr Birch has never publicly declared this potential competing interest.

Mr Birch is also chairman of another startup called Clevertar that allows businesses to create "virtual agents" and offer "personalised healthcare support, delivered at scale". This relationship is on the public record.

Public sector ethics expert Richard Mulgan, from Australian National University, said the chairman should submit to a higher standard than ordinary board members and distance himself from anything suggesting a conflict of interest.

He said perception was just as important as reality and the public, not the people involved, was the best judge of whether there was a problem.

November 15th is the opt-out date for My Health Record, but exactly what does this data system mean for Australians?

"The personal interests register must be published," Professor Mulgan said. "The fact they haven't can only lead to the perception there are conflicts of which they are ashamed."

Mr Birch, Personify Care and Clevertar did not respond to the Herald's questions.

A Serco spokesman confirmed the company met with Mr Birch "occasionally ... over the past 12 months regarding business management", but did not answer whether it had paid him.

An ADHA spokesman said under laws, "no board member alone has the ability to make a decision in board meetings or for decisions made without meetings".

In regards to Serco, it said it "has no commercial relationship with Serco and the company does not and has not had access to the My Health Record system".

Here is the link:

https://www.smh.com.au/healthcare/hidden-conflict-my-health-record-boss-privately-giving-advice-to-health-firms-20181107-p50eh9.html

The mess that is the myHR has been rolling on for a very long time now. Are there any recent reports that it is now just wonderful and widely used all over?

I have not heard any such reports!

I wonder what Mr Jim Birch thinks about the myHR all these years later?

David.

Tuesday, December 03, 2024

All Forms Of Biometric Data Need To Be Managed Very Carefully And Much Better I Believe.

This appeared a few days ago:

Why Victoria’s privacy chief is so worried about facial-recognition technology

By Kieran Rooney and Carla Jaeger

November 30, 2024 — 7.11pm

Victorian gambling venues are increasingly using off-the-shelf facial recognition technology to help identify problem gamblers, prompting concerns that sensitive data is being put at risk.

The state’s information commissioner this week said some government contractors were not being held to strict privacy laws, and admitted several data breaches of government bodies it had not investigated.

Community Clubs Victoria chief executive Andrew Lloyd has written to the national privacy commissioner requesting assistance over the issue of facial recognition. He warned that it was “problematic” that self-exclusion files were being handed over to third-party suppliers that process and install the systems.

In that letter, seen by The Age, he raised concerns that venues and retailers were purchasing facial recognition technology from sellers that “essentially provide no guidance” about whether they complied with Australia’s data security and privacy guidelines, such as how information is stored and whether it is deleted appropriately.

“I think facial recognition systems can be a wonderful tool, however the implementation and protections need to be embedded properly within the business utilising the technology,” Lloyd told The Age.

“For licensed premises, facial recognition systems can provide definite protections, and in South Australia the government has implemented a gold-standard system in licensed clubs that interfaces with the gambling self-exclusion system, which is working extremely well.

“I am concerned to hear that some venues are giving their self-exclusion files to third-party suppliers to process images and install these systems. This practice is problematic.

“I think the privacy commissioner needs to provide more education and guidance for the retail and hospitality industry, so operators are not installing systems that are not compliant and not understanding what due diligence they need to go through to meet the Australian Privacy Principles and legislation.”

Problem gamblers can choose to be excluded from gaming venues, whose facial recognition software will alert security if those on the self-exclusion register attempt to enter a casino or gaming establishment. In most cases, people who sign on to self-exclusion registers in Victoria are warned their data could be used for facial recognition.

But as states across Australia have sought to strengthen protections around pokies venues and tackle organised crime, they have encountered challenges on the use of facial-recognition technology.

New South Wales Attorney-General Michael Daley this month said he was committed to the use of facial-recognition technology but warned there was a “way to go” in how it should be used.

“We must make sure that the technology works and that its implementation protects people’s privacy,” he said in parliament.

“With cybercrime and a range of other things, we all worry that the more data these systems collect the more is put at risk of being stolen.”

Australian Privacy Foundation immediate past chair David Vaile said the spread of cheap internet-connected technology increased the risk of personal information being exposed, particularly if it wasn’t regularly updated with security upgrades.

“All the attacker needs is a tiny, hairline crack to get through, and what the defender needs to do is have 100 per cent perfect perimeter security, which is impossible,” he said.

“The business model of the attackers has proven very successful, so they’ve grown in 20 to 30 years.”

Vaile said the use of different technology across each venue made it almost impossible for people walking through the door to judge whether the facial recognition technology in use was safe.

Retailer Bunnings this month was found by the national regulator to have breached Australia’s privacy laws with its use of facial-recognition technology, a finding it has sought to review.

Following this, the Office of the Australia Information Commissioner (OAIC) issued guidance about how businesses should approach the issue.

The office said it was up to organisations to justify that the collection was necessary in the first place and that they should take reasonable steps to identify risks for how information was used, stored, destroyed and de-identified.

“The fact that FRT is available, convenient or desirable should not be relied on to establish that it is necessary to collect the information,” the OAIC guidance said.

An OAIC spokesperson said the “onus is on organisations to reassess their own practices and ensure they comply with our guidance”.

Victorian Information Commissioner Sean Morrison told a parliamentary hearing last week that his office had concerns about potential breaches because government agencies were failing to enforce privacy laws when outsourcing work.

“The expectation there is that when agencies are contracting with the provider that they pass on all of the [privacy and security] requirements to those agencies – the access to information privacy or information security. And … we don’t believe that’s happening now,” Morrison told the hearing.

Morrison said his office was aware of several data breaches that did not result in investigations, and that agencies were not reporting breaches due to fears they would be investigated.

“There were also a couple of other breaches that we are aware of that we didn’t do investigations on … but where, again, the volume of information that was [taken] was much higher than it should have been.”

Victoria’s Privacy and Data Protection Deputy Commissioner, Rachel Dixon, would not provide further information about these breaches when asked by The Age, but said: “[OVIC] cannot investigate where it does not have jurisdiction over the organisation or type of information impacted”.

In 2022, tens of thousand Victorians’ had sensitive personal information exposed after a ransomware attack on a state government contractor, Datatime.

Datatime held several contracts with six different state departments spanning decades. Dixon launched an investigation into the breach.

The report, handed down in May this year, found Datatime had troves of public-sector data dating back to as early as 2003, including sensitive personal information like medical records and family histories.

“It was an organisation that was contractually required by several government agencies to delete the data that they were collecting within a matter of months,” Dixon said at last week’s parliamentary hearing.

The report also found that along with other cybersecurity issues, Datatime and the two departments it held contracts with at the time of the breach were unclear on their obligations to destroy and de-identify government data.

Dixon was unable to complete her investigation as the company entered voluntary administration.

Under OVIC guidelines, government agencies are supposed to bind all third-party providers to comply with laws which govern the handling of personal information and public sector data. The information watchdog is currently consulting agencies as it develops a new set of guidelines.

Without enforcing these privacy obligations to contractors, there is little recourse if a privacy breach occurs, said Dixon.

A state government spokesperson said any agency aware of a breach should report it to the Office of the Victorian Information Commissioner.

Here is the link:

https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/why-victoria-s-privacy-chief-is-so-worried-about-facial-recognition-technology-20241129-p5kuo7.html

This is really a pretty sorry tale, where are government contractor collected and held, and then failed to protect a large trove of personal data.

The problem is that there are hundreds of entities are doing the exact same things and the citizen really has no idea who has what data on them, how they are protecting it and when they are going to get rid of it – if ever!

That really bad problems have not reached the public consciousness (and caused public outrage and annoyance) is, I suspect, by good luck rather than good management!

Both sides of politics have promised proper reviews and improvements for as long as I can remember – but zilch ever happens. I suspect someone many in power must like it that way? There is no doubt commerce will try to get away with as much as it can, as cheaply as it can!

So the citizen is watched and tracked with bugger all recourse! Apathy is a wonderful thing…

David.

Sunday, December 01, 2024

An Interesting Location For The Very Beginning Of Life On Earth!

This appeared a day or so ago! It is a reminder of just how ancient and diverse we are “down under”!

Where did we come from? Try looking in Shark Bay, Western Australia

Searching for the answers to life’s big questions can take you to some amazing places on Earth – such as the remote beaches of Western Australia where clues are found beneath the surface.

ZOE KEAN

Updated 9:04AM November 28, 2024

Do you ever stop and question why and how we have evolved to be the way we are? Survival is important to us, so why are we willing to risk our lives for those we care about? In a world where some species reproduce without sex, why do we need to find a partner to reproduce? Why do we fall in love, and is there a purpose in pleasure? Why are there males and females? Is life really that binary? Why do we get cancer? Why do we age, get drunk – even though it’s bad for us – or spend a third of our lives asleep? And why did we evolve consciousness and develop rich inner lives?

In contemplating evolution, we see the astonishing adaptability and persistence of life. Life on Earth has survived meteorite strikes, ice ages and continent-wide volcanic events. We, and the living forms we share this planet with, are the direct descendants of the survivors of those cataclysms. How has this history shaped us? Can learning about these feats of adaptation help us to live a better life? It’s these questions that have brought me to Gutharragudu/Shark Bay in Western Australia, a place where red desert sand meets the sea.

I’m starting my investigation at Gutharragudu because some of the secrets of the beginnings of life are held by creatures quietly photosynthesising just offshore.

I flew here on a small regional plane from Perth, having already crossed the continent from my home in lutruwita/Tasmania. When we commenced our bumpy descent and burst through the bulbous grey clouds, the vast glittering bay revealed itself – a shining patchwork of luminous blue streaked with dark patches of seagrass meadows waving below the water. In the local Malgana language, Gutharragudu means “two waters”, which describes how the 23,000-square-kilometre bay is split down the middle by the red dunes of the Francois Peron Peninsula. The light colour of the water is the first clue that Gutharragudu is special.

The water in the bay is not deep, and this is particularly true in an ultra-shallow pocket called Hamelin Pool. The shape of the bay, combined with a sediment wall caused by the seagrass, means that water flows into the pool at a higher rate than it flows out. The beating heat of Western Australia’s sunny days causes the trapped water to evaporate fast. These factors combine to make the massive pool, which is 1270km sq, almost twice as salty as the ocean. Hypersalinity is bad news for most species. In this unique environment, only the most salt-tolerant make it. The extreme conditions have allowed ancient forms of life, rare in our current world, to survive and thrive, providing a glimpse into what life on Earth may have been like billions of years ago.

Cyanobacteria exist in much of the ocean but are greedily gobbled up by sea snails, so they never get the chance to accumulate. But snails cannot hack the salinity of Hamelin Pool, which gives these tiny single-cell organisms the opportunity to collectively achieve something incredible – to build stone structures that can grow to over a metre tall.

These are called microbialites. Microbialites have different names depending on exactly how they are formed – they might be known as thrombolites or stromatolites. Both are found at Hamelin Pool, but here they’re generally called stromatolites. These rare creations are found in only a few places in the world outside of Western Australia, including a reef in the Bahamas and on the bottom of some Antarctic lakes.

The stromatolites’ domain stretches for kilometres, creating uncanny reefs along Hamelin Pool’s remote beaches. Access is strictly limited; if you want to swim among them, you need to go with a trained guide. “I usually take astronauts and astronomers out here,” explains our guide, Luke, as a small group of us travels over the red dirt track towards the beach. If life is ever found on other planets, quite likely it would look like these stromatolites.

The sun is out as we drive from red desert to the glaringly white beach. Hopping barefooted out of the four-wheel-drive, I’m surprised by the crunch between my toes. My feet are met not by sand but countless fingernail-sized seashells, metres deep. The cockle (Fragum erugatum) is another species that is adapted to the salty pool and has multiplied in its billions, creating long stretches of brilliant white coastline. As I look into the water, caramel brown shapes are visible in the teal shallows. Are they the stroms? Yes! With a rush of excitement I realise that I am about to get an insight into what life was like on the ancient Earth.

Luke shows us the narrow way by which we can wade in without accidentally touching any of these strange forms. Once I’m knee-deep, I launch in, float on the surface for a moment and then start gently kicking. Within seconds a group of stromatolites reveals itself, the choppy water causing sand to swish around them like structures in a snow globe.

Stromatolites are about half a metre tall with bulbous tops, dimpled, and an odd grey-cream colour.

Further out to sea the stromatolites become smaller and flatter, forming mosaic-like patterns on the sea floor.

They are about half a metre tall with bulbous tops, dimpled, and an odd grey-cream colour. I bob above them, oddly buoyant in the hypersaline water. The local Malgana people regard the stromatolites as their Old People and, as I swim on, they remind me of a phalanx of stony warriors. Further out, the water clears and their shapes change, becoming smaller and flatter and forming mosaic-like patterns on the sea floor.

Each form could be thousands of years old. Geologist Erica Suosaari of the Smithsonian Natural History Museum has a long record of researching Western Australia’s stromatolites.

Later, she tells me over Zoom that tiny bacteria created these stone structures in two ways. One is by “trapping and binding” sediments, like sand, that happen to wash past, creating a concrete-like substance. But they also “precipitate” minerals from the seawater, undissolving them from the water to create limestone. Coral also uses seawater to create its stone skeletons. This means only the outer layer of the stromatolites is alive.

Some of the first life on Earth looked exactly like this. If I’d flown further north and inland, I would have arrived at an arid part of Western Australia, confusingly called North Pole, where 3.4 billion-year-old stromatolite fossils have been found. Considering the Earth is about 4.5 billion years old, these are truly ancient.

Are the organisms building the living monuments I’m swimming over anything like the tiny cells that built North Pole’s precious relics? I put this to Suosaari and she explains that for many of the ancient fossils, nailing down exactly what kind of single-celled critter made them is challenging, so we can only learn about the processes these living things used to build their monuments. At Hamelin Pool, she says the stromatolites are built in a way that is “very analogous to ancient structures … regardless of the species, it’s a process that’s been happening for billions of years and it’s incredible”. It is possible the earliest stromatolites were made by cells called archaea – simple cells that are subtly different to the bacteria that were foundational for the evolution of complex life.

The dominant species at Hamelin Pool, a photosynthetic cyanobacteria called Entophysalis, is ancient. Evidence of it stretches back at least 1.8 billion years. Entophysalis is not present in the world’s other large stromatolite system in the Bahamas, and for Suosaari this makes Hamelin Pool “the most incredible place on the planet because you really do have this window into the ancient”.

For at least 80 per cent of the history of life on Earth, stromatolites were the most common way life presented itself – microbes were the only game in town. But then things changed.

However, here in Gutharragudu they live on, emerging out of the millions of Fragum cockles on the sea floor. A range of small unassuming silver fish, adapted to the extreme salinity of the water, dart around them. Less common are the baby-blue jellyfish and the languid metre-long sea snakes that contain enough venom to kill dozens of people. One olive-green snake takes a break from hunting to headbutt my camera and playfully swim through my hair before ribboning off, leaving me equally awestruck and frozen with fear.

As I snorkel through this alien scene set in crystal blue, I’m struck by the unlikeliness of it all. For much of Earth’s history, life existed in these relatively simple forms. But from them, and over millions of years, endless forms – most beautiful and most wonderful – have evolved.

The code to life

I don’t look much like a cyanobacteria – for one, you don’t need a microscope to see me. But deep in our cells we have a lot in common. Both of us are built using information stored as DNA. To get to grips with how life on Earth evolves, we need to get into the nitty-gritty of deoxyribonucleic acid, DNA to its friends. The broad strokes of evolutionary theory were understood decades before we knew about DNA. DNA provides the instructions from which our bodies are made. Molecules called nucleic acids link together in a chain, creating mega-long complex molecules. The order of these molecules provides the information needed to create an organism – our genome.

Nucleic acids preceded life as we know it. They were most likely cooked up in a hotbed of chemical reactions in ancient Earth’s numerous mineral-rich volcanic pools, though some scientists believe this happened in deep-sea vents, or even that the ingredients for life arrived on Earth via an asteroid.

Either way, early Earth was a laboratory, hosting chemical reaction after chemical reaction until one day everything came together to form a cell. While this may have happened more than once, only one lineage had what it took to survive. This cell is named the last universal common ancestor or LUCA.

From LUCA, everything that has ever lived evolved. From the ancient stromatolites of Western Australia to dinosaurs, deep-sea worms and humans, we are all related to LUCA.

This is an edited extract from Why are We Like This? by Zoe Kean, published by NewSouth Publishing, and out now.

Here is the link:

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/health/medical/where-did-we-come-from-try-looking-in-shark-bay-western-australia/news-story/004f5dfdd2bcb5196f36654dd467c603

The bottom line here is that the life found in these waters is the ancestor of all life on earth and it was from these that all life as we know it evolved.

Wonderful that we now know our story all the way back and lucky, I suspect, some of our ancestors are still around to show us where we came from all that long time ago!

Fantastic stuff that partly compensates for all the horror in the world at present….

David.

AusHealthIT Poll Number 775 – Results – 01 December 2024.

Here are the results of the poll.

Are You Expecting A Federal Election Early (March Or Earlier) In The New Year?

Yes                                                                        15 (56%)

No                                                                         11 (41%)

I Have No Idea                                                       1 (4%)

Total No. Of Votes: 27

A close run thing with an early poll looking reasonably likely!

Any insights on the poll are welcome, as a comment, as usual!

Poor voting turnout. 

1 of 27 who answered the poll admitted to not being sure about the answer to the question!

Again, many, many special thanks to all those who voted! 

David.

Friday, November 29, 2024

I Wonder How Many Organizations Will Actually Be Ready For This In Time?

This popped up a few days ago:

Is Your Hospital Ready for the My Health Record Deadline?

22nd November 2024

Is Your Hospital Ready for the December 1 My Health Record Compliance Deadline?

By December 1, 2024, Australian hospitals are required to have a plan in place to upload clinical information, such as discharge summaries, to My Health Record (MHR). Starting in January 2025, accrediting agencies will be reviewing hospital compliance with these requirements, including monitoring and evaluating the implementation process.

Steps to Prepare for the December 1, 2024 Deadline

Hospitals have been preparing for this transition, and there are several key steps to ensure readiness by December 1:

  1. Audit Your Current Processes
    Begin with an audit of your hospital’s discharge summary workflow. Identify areas where manual processes can be improved or automated to streamline uploads and minimise errors.
  2. Engage Your Technology Providers
    Work with your technology providers to confirm that your systems are compatible with MHR integration. Platforms like Civica’s Dox, a clinical documentation system, automate the discharge summary upload process, reducing workload and ensuring timely submissions.
  3. Train Your Healthcare Team
    Team engagement is critical for a smooth transition. Provide training for both clinical and administrative staff to emphasise the importance of accuracy and timeliness in uploading discharge summaries, highlighting the positive impact on patient care.
  4. Implement Ongoing Monitoring
    Regular compliance checks, including audits of discharge summary uploads, can help detect missed or delayed uploads early. A dedicated compliance team can track your hospital’s status and support continuous improvement efforts.
  5. Keep Stakeholders Informed
    Communication is key. Inform patients about the benefits of having their discharge summaries in MHR and keep external providers like GPs and specialists updated to foster a collaborative, patient-centred approach.

My Health Record: A New Era of Information Sharing

My Health Record is an Australian Government initiative that consolidates Australians' health information in a secure, accessible platform. Since its inception, MHR adoption has expanded, giving healthcare providers from GPs to specialists and hospitals access to critical health information whenever needed. This integration helps reduce risks from fragmented or outdated data, providing a more seamless care experience.

Discharge summaries include essential information about a patient’s treatment, prescribed medications, and follow-up care recommendations, which are vital for continued care. Preparing now will ensure that your hospital meets the requirements smoothly and effectively.

Embracing Compliance as an Opportunity

Meeting this new standard, signals to patients that your hospital prioritises quality and safety. Patients benefit from better-coordinated care, while your hospital stands out as a leader in patient-centred digital healthcare. With the deadline fast approaching, now is the time to finalise preparations and embrace the benefits of a connected healthcare ecosystem.

Email us to learn how we can help you navigate this important transition.

Find out more

Here is the link:

https://www.civica.com/en-au/insights/is-your-hospital-ready-for-the-my-health-record-deadline/

I would love to hear from those who find the level of readiness is not all that might be desired!

I suspect there will be more than one!

David.

Thursday, November 28, 2024

It Is Very Dangerous To Speak Truth Unto Power!

This appeared the other day and is really quite a worry I believe…..

This doctor spoke out about allegations of medical fraud. The next day, she was asked to resign

By Henrietta Cook and Melissa Cunningham

November 22, 2024 — 6.46pm

A respected anaesthetist has been dismissed from her role at a prestigious medical college after saying Australia’s health billing system lacked transparency and was skewed towards profit.

In an email obtained by this masthead, the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists (ANZCA) accused Associate Professor Joanna Sutherland of tarnishing the reputation of anaesthetists and asked her to stand down as chair of its safety and quality committee.

The college’s response shocked many in the medical community, who perceived her comments to this masthead as “measured and reasonable”.

Sutherland was responding to allegations that dozens of anaesthetists and surgeons on Victoria’s Mornington Peninsula had engaged in fraud, double-dipping and pocketing off-the-book fees. The claims – revealed exclusively by The Age – have sparked investigations by a federal regulator and private health insurers.

“If these allegations are found to be true, in my view, that’s outrageous, unethical and it would be unacceptable,” she was quoted as saying in The Age article. “Consumers are ripe for exploitation.”

But the morning after the article was published, college president Professor Dave Story wrote to Sutherland “to request that you resign as chair of the safety and quality committee of ANZCA”.

In the email, Story said Sutherland’s quotes had concerned and offended many fellows.

“They are angry that their reputation has been slurred by a member of a major college committee,” he wrote.

“No one condones fraudulent practice, but the language you chose to use implied that many anaesthetists are not practicing ethically.”

Story wrote that the college had lost confidence in her “ability to hold this very important role” because she did not notify it of her plans to speak out.

“It does not help our vulnerable patients to have the false idea that the anaesthetist caring for them is fraudulent,” he said.

Sutherland said she was disappointed by the college’s decision and had been speaking out in a personal capacity.

“The response from the college has been to close ranks and protect the profession,” she said.

“There have been allegations about fraudulent billing, including billing by anaesthetists that would appear to be unethical and potentially illegal ... in the absence of a constructive response from the profession, I don’t think these allegations will go away.”

Sutherland, who was appointed chair of the committee in 2022 and has been a fellow of the college since 1992, said that while she believed the majority of anaesthetists did the right thing, unethical and illegal billing were “not insignificant”.

Medical fraud and compliance expert Dr Margaret Faux said the college had forced the resignation of the one person who could have helped them navigate a path out the mess.

“The medical bullies always attack whistleblowers, unfortunately,” she said.

Faux said the college had sent a message that if these allegations were proven, they would not perceive them as unethical, unacceptable or outrageous – the way Sutherland did.

Dr Nick Coatsworth, an ambassador for the Australian Patients Association, urged the college to reconsider its decision, describing Sutherland as “an exemplary contributor to the medical community”.

He said her published comments were “measured and reasonable”.

“This sends a terrible message to publicly minded doctors, particularly anaesthetists, that their desire to reform their profession will be met with hostile action against them,” he said.

Coatsworth said he suspected the usually fair-minded college had come under intense pressure from a small group of largely private anaesthetists.

Rachel David, chief executive of Private Healthcare Australia, said health professionals had a duty to act responsibly and ethically and call out bad behaviour.

“It is profoundly disappointing when the medical culture tries to cover up wrongdoing instead of requiring the highest standards of themselves and their colleagues,” she said, adding that Sutherland should be immediately reinstated.

David said the government needed to look at regulating medical fees and criminalising illegal billing practices.

“Punishing a whistleblower or a truth-teller is completely unacceptable. Shooting the messenger is not the answer, honesty and transparency of medical billing is a basic patient’s right,” she said.

In a statement to this masthead, Story said the role of the safety and quality committee chair was to support safe clinical practice in anaesthesia.

“The committee’s remit does not include billing practices,” he said on Friday.

Story said the majority of anaesthetists operated with integrity and professionalism and made every effort to comply with increasingly complex billing requirements.

He said the college did not condone the alleged billing practices outlined by this masthead and supported calls for regulatory bodies to investigate any claims of fraudulent behaviour.

Here is the link:

https://www.smh.com.au/national/victoria/this-doctor-spoke-out-about-allegations-of-medical-fraud-the-next-day-she-was-asked-to-resign-20241121-p5ksmt.html

On the face of it, a significant degree of over-reaction I reckon suggesting those in power do not have a clear conscience!

What do you think?

David.

Wednesday, November 27, 2024

How Long Do You Think This Ruling Will Last?

This appeared last week:

NSW Chief Justice Andrew Bell bans AI use for evidence documents

Ellie Dudley

3:42PM November 22, 2024.

The top judge of Australia’s largest jurisdiction has issued a sweeping direction effectively banning lawyers from using artificial intelligence to create crucial evidence papers, and requiring them to add a disclaimer declaring they have not used AI to develop the document.

NSW Chief Justice Andrew Bell has also declared judges are not permitted to use AI to formulate reasons for judgments or to edit draft judgments, and has instructed them to remain “astute to identify any undisclosed use of Gen AI in court documents” filed by parties before them.

The Chief Justice made the edicts in two separate practices notes released this week – one for practitioners, and a second for judges. A practice note is a document used to provide directions on particular aspects of how the court expects proceedings to be run.

In the note to practitioners, Chief Justice Bell said artificial intelligence must not be used in generating the contents of affidavits, witness statements, character references or other material that reflects a witness’s evidence or is to be used in cross-examination.

“Affidavits, witness statements, character references should contain and reflect a person’s own knowledge, not AI-generated content,” he said. “Gen AI must not be used for the purpose of altering, embellishing, strengthening or diluting or otherwise rephrasing a witness’s evidence when expressed in written form.”

Australia’s courts have been grappling with the advent of AI over the past 18 months as the technology continues to infiltrate the courtroom.

In February, an ACT Supreme Court judge dealt with the first known case of AI in court, when the brother of a man found guilty used ChatGPT to write a character reference for him.

Last month a Melbourne lawyer was referred to the legal watchdog after he was caught citing fake AI-generated cases in a family court matter, causing a hearing to be adjourned.

In his practice note, Chief Justice Bell said that if AI was used to create written submissions or summaries of an argument, a lawyer must be careful to ensure all citations “exist, are accurate and are relevant to the proceedings”.

NSW is just the latest jurisdiction to release a practice note of this kind, with Victoria and Queensland releasing similar guidelines earlier this year.

In Victoria, parties are required to tell one another of any assistance provided by AI when preparing a case. In Queensland, lawyers are similarly encouraged to disclose any AI involvement.

But Chief Justice Bell will require lawyers to include a disclosure in affidavits, witness statements and character references that AI was not used, including “by way of altering, embellishing, strengthening or diluting or rephrasing a witness’s evidence”.

“For the avoidance of doubt, the deponent of the affidavit, witness statement or character reference is not required to make the disclosure ... where the annexure or exhibit has not been prepared or created for the purposes of the proceedings,” the practice note reads.

Expert reports are not to be prepared using AI, the Chief Justice said, without prior permission from the court.

“Expert reports are required to state the opinion or opinions of the expert, and his or her reasoning process,” the practice note reads. “Gen AI must not be used to draft or prepare the content of an expert report (or any part of an expert report) without prior leave of the court.”

AI 'red flags'

Chief Justice Bell instructed judges to look out for the following "red flags" when checking to see if a document has been created using AI.

  • Inaccurate or non-existent case or legislative citations;
  • Incorrect, inaccurate, out of date or incomplete analysis and application of the law in relation to a legal proposition or set of facts;
  • Case law references that are inapplicable or unsuited to the jurisdiction, both in terms of substantive and procedural law;
  • Case law references that are out of date and do not take account of relevant developments in the law;
  • Submissions that diverge from your general understanding of the applicable law or which contain obvious substantive errors;
  • The use of non-specific, repetitive language; and
  • Use of language, expressions or spelling more closely associated with other jurisdictions.

For judges, AI should only be used for secondary legal research purposes, the Chief Justice said, however judges should be aware of AI “hallucinating” fake case citations.

Judges should also be aware of the fact that “any search requests or interactions or prompts with a Gen AI chatbot may, unless disabled, be automatically added to the large language model database, remembered and used to respond to queries from other users”.

“The product of all Gen AI-generated research, even if apparently polished and convincing, should be closely and carefully scrutinised and verified for accuracy, completeness, currency and suitability before making any use of it,” Chief Justice Bell said. “Gen AI research should not be used as a substitute for personal research by traditional methods.”

The practice notes will come into effect from the beginning of the 2025 law term on February 3.

Here is the link:

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/nsw-chief-justice-andrew-bell-bans-ai-use-for-evidence-documents/news-story/afab357cb23884b46012c4e18d69bed4

Why do I suddenly have an image of King Canute filling my field of vision….

I suspect this practice note will be obsolete pretty much on the day it is published!

David.