Doctors became worse at spotting cancer after relying on AI for help, study finds

[midian182]

Facepalm: For all that AI is able to assist skilled professionals, doing so comes with the concern that overreliance could make people worse at their jobs if the technology is removed. This theory has essentially been proved after doctors became less adept at identifying potential cancer risks in patients after consistently using AI to help make those observations.

A study on the phenomenon (published in The Lancet) took place at four endoscopy centers in Poland, which were taking part in a trial program that saw AI used in colonoscopies for potential cancer prevention.

The researchers sought to discover whether continuous exposure to AI changed endoscopists' behavior when conducting colonoscopies. They assessed how endoscopists who regularly used AI performed the procedure when the tool was not in use.

The research team analyzed 1,442 colonoscopies conducted by experienced health workers – each had performed over 2,000 colonoscopies.

The success rate of detecting colon cancer was tracked for three months before AI tools were introduced, and again for three months after. Once AI was implemented, colonoscopies were randomly assigned to either use AI assistance or be performed without it.

In a result that was not entirely surprising, doctors who had been using AI saw their detection success rate drop by around 6% when the technology was removed.

"To our knowledge this is the first study to suggest a negative impact of regular AI use on healthcare professionals' ability to complete a patient-relevant task in medicine of any kind," said Dr. Marcin Romanczyk, Academy of Silesia in Poland, one of the study's authors.

"Our results are concerning given the adoption of AI in medicine is rapidly spreading," Romanczyk added. "We urgently need more research into the impact of AI on health professionals' skills across different medical fields."

This isn't the first time we've had proof that overreliance on AI can negatively affect a person's cognitive abilities. A recent MIT study found that as participants in an experiment wrote a series of essays, electronic brain monitoring revealed substantially weaker connections between regions of the brain in those who used large language models. This correlated with poorer memory and more derivative output.

According to he American Medical Association, around two out of every three physicians are already using AI for a multitude of purposes. While some of these are administrative tasks like documentation of billing codes, the tools are also used for assistive diagnosis. The 66% usage rate marks a 78% jump from the 38% of physicians who said they used AI in 2023.

Permalink to story:

Doctors became worse at spotting cancer after relying on AI for help, study finds

 

[BogdanR]

Well, first the Internet has made us stupid. Now it is AI’s turn.

 

[GeoffreyA]

It's a continuation of losing one's sharpness from relying on Google and the internet, rather than getting knowledge the hard way, such as visiting one's local library, or poring over books.

 

[RudyBob]

Yep. So many docs are really fakers.

 

[Dreadcthulhu]

It's a continuation of losing one's sharpness from relying on Google and the internet, rather than getting knowledge the hard way, such as visiting one's local library, or poring over books.

Amusingly, some people in the past have claimed that using writing and books itself was not a good way to learn things, and could cause a decline in mental ability. Plato discussed that subject a fair bit. (Of course, ironically we only know Plato discussed it because someone else wrote it down.)

 

[GeoffreyA]

Amusingly, some people in the past have claimed that using writing and books itself was not a good way to learn things, and could cause a decline in mental ability. Plato discussed that subject a fair bit. (Of course, ironically we only know Plato discussed it because someone else wrote it down.)

True! I do agree the best way to learn things would be "in real life." As people say, book knowledge is not the same as hands-on skill.

 

[wiyosaya]

Color me not surprised. With all the other areas that AI currently sucks at performing, its no surprise to me that a study finally found that in this case AI is not at all better at helping anyone spot cancer.

Its too bad because prior to this, medicine, specifically diagnostics, was considered a promising area for AI.

Yep. So many docs are really fakers.

I think if you really decided to look at the issue, you would find that Doctors are pushed by corporations that want them to do more and more with less and less resources - all in the name of profit. Blame the doctors all you want, but I think it goes to the top of the corporations they work for.

Check out a show called "The Resident" for what is likely a more realistic view.

 

[KaitouX]

Color me not surprised. With all the other areas that AI currently sucks at performing, its no surprise to me that a study finally found that in this case AI is not at all better at helping anyone spot cancer.

Its too bad because prior to this, medicine, specifically diagnostics, was considered a promising area for AI.

But that's not what this study is saying?
This study seems to say that after relying on AI, doctors had worse detection rate when not using AI, not while using it.
I don't think the study is questioning the AI itself, but the fact that it degrades the ability of the people using it.

 

[BogdanR]

True! I do agree the best way to learn things would be "in real life." As people say, book knowledge is not the same as hands-on skill.

And vice versa.
The best is a combination of both theory and practice.

 

[AnilD]

Feels like we just reinvented the GPS problem for medicine — once you stop reading the map yourself, you forget how to get anywhere without the robot voice telling you.

 

[scoffer]

So, to extrapolate - Some time in the not-too-distant future - mankind will have regressed to the point where nobody knows s##t about s##t................Thanks to AI. (and all the money-grubbing techbros constantly pushing it). You heard it here first.....LOL

 

[StrikerRocket]

As a teacher, this is what I've been saying from the beginning: if you ask AI to complete tasks in your place, you become worse at what you're supposed to do! This is just common sense, and it's what I tell my students. If you ask a machine to do your homework, the machine learns while you become an uneducated being! (apparently, event trivial words such as I-d-I-o-t are censored...)
AI has to be used as a tool, and humans have to keep trying to get better, otherwise, they're bound to become useless...

 

[lonetac]

Its the same thing with folks who use AI to write papers, emails, etc. That part of their brain shuts down and eventually they find themselves unable to do it without AI. There was an article here on techspot about this recently I believe and it showed scans of the brain from someone using AI and not and the person using AI is literally dumbing themselves down and making it so their brain cant do things they should be able to.

 

[wiyosaya]

But that's not what this study is saying?
This study seems to say that after relying on AI, doctors had worse detection rate when not using AI, not while using it.
I don't think the study is questioning the AI itself, but the fact that it degrades the ability of the people using it.

Ah, so it is. That's what I get for not reading the article.

However, the fact that using AI hurts cognitive function in people who use it regularly is yet another black eye for AI, IMO, and in Doctors, no less, who should be functioning on a "higher level" of cognitive ability.

I don't use AI, and I think it is nothing more than a FAD, and not to mention there is actual evidence that it harms the cognitive function of people who use it regularly.

Then again, people know that all forms of smoking are harmful, and people still do it anyway.