Digital health

Google’s DeepMind and Healthcare

by Jane Huston

I’d filed away to read later a Fast Company article whose headline proclaimed Google will be applying artificial intelligence to healthcare problems. Upon returning to read it, I was a bit disappointed to see how speculative the article was. Basically, Google acquired a company with a messaging app for hospital staff that streamlines communication. It’s been hinted that Google might apply artificial intelligence tools to help identify patients at risk of kidney failure whom a clinician might not deem at risk.

stethoscope and smartphone

Joining forces?

Even if machine learning were applied to predict which patients might be at risk of kidney failure,  that’s not really the end of the story. Once patients are identified, there have to be effective interventions to help them, and perhaps moreover, the entire system where this is occurring needs to allow for these predictions and interventions to take place. Looking at the big picture, is identification of at-risk patients and communication among clinicians the true ‘problem’ that needs to be solved? Or is there a different systemic problem or bottleneck that is truly responsible for delaying care? While reading the article, I found myself nodding in agreement to this excerpt:

[S]ome health experts fear that this kind of technology is just putting a Band-Aid on a broken system… “Some people have this utopian plan that you can sprinkle some AI on a broken health system and make things better,” says Jordan Shlain, a Bay Area-based doctor and entrepreneur who has advised the NHS.

Overall, I’m really excited about the idea of using data and machine learning to improve care, but it’s important to be realistic about where these tools can help. I think the promise to fix “broken systems” is overinflated. Artificial intelligence might help us identify at-risk patients, make better diagnoses, or select specific treatment plans, but at the end of the day, healthcare systems are built by and made up of people– and I’m not sure machines can fix those systems.

Why health tech needs MPHs

by Jane Huston

While reading this Fast Company article about health care tech companies, I was struck by the following quote:

“The tech community isn’t used to dealing with studies, FDA approval, publications, and reimbursement…[but] the tech community wants things to happen fast. Obviously that doesn’t work in health care.”

I believe new technology and innovative approaches will be a net positive to the health care industry, but I think this article highlights the need for health tech companies to listen and learn from the current state of the industry. Those with industry experience are going to be invaluable partners– yes, even experience in the industry they are trying desperately to disrupt.

One of most important skills/values I learned during my MPH degree was the importance of evidence base. If you’re going to set policies or recommendations that affect how thousands (or millions) of people receive care, you need to be as confident as possible that you’re recommending the right things. One professor’s quote that I’ve never forgotten: “If a doctor makes a mistake, he or she might be responsible for the death of the patient. When a public health professional makes a mistake, they could be responsible for thousands of deaths.”

No more snake oil please.

Motivated by that principle, my classmates and I spent our time learning how to collect data and interpret it to find meaning; to evaluate new research by critically reading methods sections in academic literature; to understand who sets medical practice standards, recommends preventive measures or screening, or monitors food safety, drugs, or devices; and learning some of the complexities of who pays for care and who determines what gets paid for.

I think all of the above skills and ways of thinking will be really useful to emerging health tech companies, and I hope they’ll value that input. Not to say they aren’t already, but based on the above article, it certainly seems like it could be time for more MPH graduates to migrate into health tech.