Automated ECG interpretation has been around for a long time and it is great for routine screening but complex interpretation requires neural net processing. This requires a well trained MD who is acquainted with the entire clinical picture. Most physicians I know are well ahead of the technology wave and embrace new technologies early but the majority of good medicine still occurs between the ears and between a patient and doctor.
Interesting, so there is an 'app for that.
IMO still believe majority of good 'common' medicine can be 'enhanced' with automated information/checklist etc based on information presented and possibly lead to obtaining other information gathering that is needed for a refined diagnosis. The unique cases will always require specialist and usually a group of them just because those are 'odd' cases .
In the aerospace world advanced aircraft and airlines use 'neural net' type 'algorithms'(example- from simple yes no to Baysian networks etc) to tie in all aspests of an aircrafts present/ past data and performance. Then spit out its 'present' and predicted future health status. This requires vast quantities of data and knowledge to sort through it and apply the algorithms. It can be done for all 'known' issues. However, its not a panacea, each failure code(illness) may have many causes(diagnosis).
Unknown issues will still need the experts.
Back to topic, as for personal id by heart rate... doesn't the patent office require some 'proof' it will work? (the perpetual motion rule)
Automated ECG interpretation has been around for a long time and it is great for routine screening but complex interpretation requires neural net processing. This requires a well trained MD who is acquainted with the entire clinical picture. Most physicians I know are well ahead of the technology wave and embrace new technologies early but the majority of good medicine still occurs between the ears and between a patient and doctor.
It also requires a real EKG, not a 1 lead heart monitor like the iPhone will be. Each lead of a standard 12 lead EKG looks at a different area of the heart. By only using the iPhone, you can't possibly get more than 1 lead, so all this really is, is a pukes monitor. It's possible it could identify a dangerous arrhythmia, but it certainly couldn't be used to diagnose a heart attack.
Now, if apple is going to start making clothes with Bluetooth enabled EKG leads built into them...then they might be onto something.
The new talk in automated EKG reading is 80 lead EKGs. The leads aren't applied one at a time like traditional 12 leads are. Instead, its just a big sheet on your front and a big sheet on your back. Computers are almost as good as trained docs at reading a 12 lead. When you ramp it up to an 80 lead, the computer crushes the docs. I could see something like this becoming standard wearable clothing in the future. Imagine, full-time heart monitor on every person via their Apple iUndershirts and iPhones. Could be awesome, and lifesaving...hmmm. Mental note: invent wearable EKG undershirts.
Comments
Automated ECG interpretation has been around for a long time and it is great for routine screening but complex interpretation requires neural net processing. This requires a well trained MD who is acquainted with the entire clinical picture. Most physicians I know are well ahead of the technology wave and embrace new technologies early but the majority of good medicine still occurs between the ears and between a patient and doctor.
Interesting, so there is an 'app for that.
IMO still believe majority of good 'common' medicine can be 'enhanced' with automated information/checklist etc based on information presented and possibly lead to obtaining other information gathering that is needed for a refined diagnosis. The unique cases will always require specialist and usually a group of them just because those are 'odd' cases .
In the aerospace world advanced aircraft and airlines use 'neural net' type 'algorithms'(example- from simple yes no to Baysian networks etc) to tie in all aspests of an aircrafts present/ past data and performance. Then spit out its 'present' and predicted future health status. This requires vast quantities of data and knowledge to sort through it and apply the algorithms. It can be done for all 'known' issues. However, its not a panacea, each failure code(illness) may have many causes(diagnosis).
Unknown issues will still need the experts.
Back to topic, as for personal id by heart rate... doesn't the patent office require some 'proof' it will work? (the perpetual motion rule)
Automated ECG interpretation has been around for a long time and it is great for routine screening but complex interpretation requires neural net processing. This requires a well trained MD who is acquainted with the entire clinical picture. Most physicians I know are well ahead of the technology wave and embrace new technologies early but the majority of good medicine still occurs between the ears and between a patient and doctor.
It also requires a real EKG, not a 1 lead heart monitor like the iPhone will be. Each lead of a standard 12 lead EKG looks at a different area of the heart. By only using the iPhone, you can't possibly get more than 1 lead, so all this really is, is a pukes monitor. It's possible it could identify a dangerous arrhythmia, but it certainly couldn't be used to diagnose a heart attack.
Now, if apple is going to start making clothes with Bluetooth enabled EKG leads built into them...then they might be onto something.
The new talk in automated EKG reading is 80 lead EKGs. The leads aren't applied one at a time like traditional 12 leads are. Instead, its just a big sheet on your front and a big sheet on your back. Computers are almost as good as trained docs at reading a 12 lead. When you ramp it up to an 80 lead, the computer crushes the docs. I could see something like this becoming standard wearable clothing in the future. Imagine, full-time heart monitor on every person via their Apple iUndershirts and iPhones. Could be awesome, and lifesaving...hmmm. Mental note: invent wearable EKG undershirts.