July 3, 2026

"The process of note-writing helps me formulate my medical decision-making and then check whether it really holds up...."

"When that cognitive labor is offloaded to a machine, I’ve come to see, my job shifts. Even when I try to speak my reasoning aloud for the A.I. scribe, I am still doing something different from writing the note myself. I am no longer using the note, sentence by sentence, to think through the case in my own words, to decide what to emphasize, what to soften — or, as I’m writing, to identify when my reasoning strains. And unlike when I dictate a note, I can’t watch my own phrasing appear on the screen in real time. With the A.I.-generated note, I am instead auditing afterward. I am playing a version of 'Where’s Waldo?' — What’s missing? Has this note gone astray, and if so, where? — and it’s a search made all the more difficult because the A.I.’s draft arrives fluent, confident. It sounds so right."

Writes Helen Ouyang, in "How A.I. Might Change the Way Doctors Think/For generations, writing up a summary of a patient exam was a vital step for physicians trying to make an accurate diagnosis. What happens when A.I. does it for them?" (NYT).

"That cognitive shift does not happen the moment the A.I. scribe delivers a note. It begins in the exam room. Because I know A.I. is recording, I stop listening in the same way. Before A.I. scribes arrived, I would outline a story in my head as a patient talked, fitting the pieces together so I would know what to ask next. In the scribe’s presence, that work is deferred. Let the machine do it! The mind drifts."

35 comments:

john mosby said...

If someone/thing else is taking notes for you, wouldn't that enable you to pay more attention, not less? Even if you are a proficient stenographer, the act of writing forces you to be a step behind your conversational partner.

Drifting is a problem for professionals of all sorts. The other person says something that triggers a train of thought for how to react to it. Then seconds later, you realize you missed the last couple of sentences. Ouyang even admits this: "I would outline a story in my head as a patient talked, fitting the pieces together so I would know what to ask next." Hopefully she didn't miss some important bit of info said while she was outlining. CC, JSM

Aggie said...

Anybody that has ever written anything manually, with pen, pencil, or keyboard, knows that the physical act of writing imparts structure to your thinking. It's a learned skill that gets better with practice. Dictation is just a one-sided conversation, talking. That's a different kind of activity, almost entirely. I see her point and have long thought something very similar. The product of writing with manual activity of some kind is different to the product of talking.

Smilin' Jack said...

“The Standalone vs. Assisted Paradox (2024–2025): Researchers at Stanford HAI tested doctors diagnosing complex conditions. Unassisted doctors scored 74% accuracy, and doctors given access to ChatGPT scored 76%. However, ChatGPT running entirely on its own achieved a 92% accuracy score. Follow-up analyses suggest doctors often perform worse with AI support because they suffer from "automation neglect" or blindly stick to an incorrect initial human impression while ignoring the AI's correct prompt.”

Shut up, doc. I want to hear what ChatGPT has to say.

Wince said...

I always wondered who transcribed the recording tape in Jaws after Hooper examined the remains of the girl killed by the shark.

The notes transcribed and organized by the AI assistant I can wear around my neck are very useful. For some strange reason I find myself often asking the nearest guy in a suit for a glass of water and replicating Hooper's heavy gasping and admonishment to Brody, "do not smoke in here, thank you".

Original Mike said...

Thinking is hard. People think making it "easier" is a good thing. It is not. The end result suffers.

Reddington said...

Different strokes for different folks. Maybe AI doesn’t jibe with your workflow. Maybe it augments somebody else’s.

Howard said...

What a maroon! Right now when you go to see your doctor they are focused on the computer while they ask questions and they barely even look at the patient. As we all know, so much can be learned about the health of an individual by carefully looking at their body, their eyes, their countenance, their body language. It's a beautiful thing to let a machine record the conversation you're having with a patient as your looking at them. Intently rather than focused on a screen.

bagoh20 said...

I prefer my medical via A.I. I can ask as many questions as I want at my own pace, cross-check them, and ask again. Leaving my health and survival up to an encounter lasting a couple of minutes is not smart nor necessary now. Besides, my doctor, no matter how good, just isn't as knowledgeable or up to date as the entire internet. Any failings of this new technology in its infancy will be remedied very quickly. I've been disappointed with the accuracy before, but I notice it getting better every day. If I were on the doctor end with people's lives at stake, I'd use A.I. to check all my work and give me more time to do it right. If I get something wrong, I can blame the machine.

Tacitus said...

Well Jack, a closer look at that study says that it improves outcome for less experienced clinicians but was not as good as old hands working without AI. Explanation? Partly GIGO. A good clinician listens more. What is being said? How is it being said? What is not being said? If an AI, or an intern, just takes Symptom A and says it will be explained by running tests B,C,D,E, and F it's not ideal. I'm speaking from the ER doc perspective here. A patient presenting with chest pain might need a full cardiac workup. But if they are 16 years old and just started esophagus irritating tetracycline for their acne...maybe not. I retired when EMR systems were just dipping a toe into the waters of AI. I saw the benefits of electronic systems. You could often access very useful past info and review tests and images more conveniently. But the impact of potentially making AI central to health care has not yet been thought through.

bagoh20 said...

Can't you just ask the machine to give you the notes verbatim as you dictated them. This sounds like a made up concern with an easy fix.

rehajm said...

my dr asked if it was okay for him to
use ai for the exam. My wife fresh of the office’s privacy meeting, immediately pointed out the lawyers were going to put a stop to that right quick. I suspect she’s right…

Lem Vibe Bandit said...

This is an easy one. Just go back to doing it yourself.

Lance said...

"because the A.I.’s draft arrives fluent, confident."

This is a big problem with current LLM's: they're programmed to mimic perfect assurance. They're never wrong. Except when you point out their inaccuracies. They accept the correction, but immediately return to unbroken confidence. There's no epistemic humility at all.

Rabel said...

Wait a minute. The AI Scribe is recording my visit with the doctor?

Vance said...

I will go off topic. It is the 4th of July weekend, America's 250'th anniversary, so I will post a link truly in keeping with America: Patriotic good looking woman showing her patriotism. Guaranteed to not be a Democrat! https://tinyurl.com/4mah4j67

loudogblog said...

I don't use any kind of voice recorder or AI aid to make notes. I've always found that pulling out a piece of paper and making a note always works for me. The information on the computer is just too much unimportant data, so I'm not that good at checking all the computer data consistently. But having a physical note in my pocket helps to remind me that there is something, that is on my person, that needs attention.

I've also noticed that a lot of YouTube lawyers are advertising this AI note taking/conversation recording device. One of the things that they mentions is that it provides AI summaries of what it hears. Summaries. When I open a PDF, my computer asks me if I want an AI summary of the document. I never OK that because I feel that I need to actually read all the data in its full context. What if the AI decides that something that I would consider important isn't important? What if the AI comes to a different conclusion about what is being said? You see the problem. AI can be a useful tool, but it can't be relied upon to do all the really important stuff. AI reminds me of that stereotypical autistic person who can solve complex math problems in their head but fails on very simple, common sense tasks.

Ice Nine said...

With 40yrs of emergency medicine practice under my belt, I can tell you that taking a history from a patient in an ER exam room is generally a messy, disjointed, and often maddening process. It involves your attempt at incisive questioning and orderly discussion - invariably broken by extraneous tangents from the patient and his relatives, your backing up, asking again with a rephrased question, repeating, focusing, etc until you manage to get a cogent and vital picture of what is going on. The notion that AI can make order out of this that accurately reflects where the doctor was going, what he was cogitating, how he was integrating the info on the fly to come to his conclusion, defies belief.

Not incidentally, my clinical notes were always written (dictated) as if I were discussing the case with the hostile, conniving malpractice plaintiff's attorney in cross-examination in court. (FWIW, I was never sued in those 40yrs, which is near-unheard of.) Those notes were always truthful but they were constructed to present my thinking on the case - not his dishonest reconstruction of it. That's gone - and direct recording of the interview, which includes all the aforementioned junk, presents that same ambulance-chaser with a veritable smorgasbord of irrelevant but useful to his game material. Good luck in court, Doc.

At any rate, this innovation will obviously - inevitably - become the norm. And the beneficial doctor-patient relationship practice of medicine will decline even further. Robot medical records from robot doctors coming right up, folks.

loudogblog said...

Howard said...
"Right now when you go to see your doctor they are focused on the computer while they ask questions and they barely even look at the patient."

When I had my accident last year, I interacted with about 30 doctors during the month and a half I was in the hospital. I seriously had visits from teams of doctors from time to time. The nephrology team, the cardiac team, the transplant team, ect. I don't recall any of them ever ignoring me to focus their attention on the screen. They would come to see me, tell me what was currently happening, give me test results, let me know what I should do next, ect. Then they prompted me to ask them questions and they answered them. They didn't even pull out any devices or notepads to take notes. Granted, once in a while they might turn to the computer in the room to check on something, like test results, but I always felt that they were totally focused on me when they were in my room.

Interested Bystander said...

I can envision a case where AI may see a solution to a problem that the doctor overlooked. As we use it more it’s on us to check it and make sure it’s right. It’s a tool like a typewriter or a computer. It’s there to make our life easier. If AI gives the physician more time to chat with patients that’s a good thing.

Original Mike said...

My concern with recordings in the office visit setting, which they always ask permission for now, is not with the recording of my comments, but rather the inhibition it might have on my doctor's comments.

Aggie said...

I'm thinking of signing up for an A.I. subscription. Question for the board: Which one is recommended, and why do you like it? I can see that Claude is recommended more for programmers, and ChatGPT for more general knowledge. But while my needs are skewed toward the latter, I don't like the moves of OpenAI's leader, Altman and would prefer not to send him more money.

Lazarus said...

It's standard procedure now for doctors to write their notes on the computer and discreetly search online for answers to the questions patients ask. I suppose it's better than assuming that doctors are omniscient and relying on what they actually remember for answers.

Yancey Ward said...

We, as a civilization, may be in a race against time- we need to develop AI and robots capable of maitaining themselves and our infrastructure before we, the people, become too incompetent and stupid to do so.

Interested Bystander said...

Howard said...
What a maroon! Right now when you go to see your doctor they are focused on the computer while they ask questions and they barely even look at the patient. As we all know, so much can be learned about the health of an individual by carefully looking at their body, their eyes, their countenance, their body language. It's a beautiful thing to let a machine record the conversation you're having with a patient as your looking at them. Intently rather than focused on a screen.

7/3/26, 10:38 AM


My doc at Kaiser uses an app on his phone now that transcribed everything we say. Now we actually look at each other and talk. It’s so much better than the old system where he had his back to me typing. Better for me and for him. He saves hours of his day and is able to give me more time. It’s noticeably better.

Rabel said...

Some of y'all need to shop for better doctors.

Tacitus said...

IceNine. Similar observations. Similar approach. Thank god for typing class in high school, where I was iirc the only guy. I basically typed a short story for every patient I saw. Nobody is going to be right 100% of the time. But if I got led astray by patient history, conflicting symptoms, questionable lab results...you could see my work. Also never sued.

Dude1394 said...

I have been with doctors who did. Nothing BUT typed out notes while not listening to anything until I forced them to. I fail to see why a more accurate tool is a bad thing.

Christopher B said...

Not a doc but I align in general with the act of writing and editing assisting me in thinking through what I'm trying to express. I don't know that recording and summarizing spoken thoughts would necessarily be an accurate reflection of my intent as they would combined with an unknown amount of influence from the AI's prior programming.

Kirk Parker said...

All you guys talking about the "old" system where the doctor was focused on typing onto the computer have no idea what you are talking about. What you are describing is the ghastly EMR system; the real old system predates that. Ice Nine and Tacitus may supply their own perspectives, but for what it's worth my brother-in-law the retired ER doc absolutely hated EMR and thought it was a horrible step backwards in actual patient care, at least for immediate issues.

Temujin said...

The idea behind the more complex AI medical systems is to free the doctor up so that he/she can actually look at their patent's face. Look them in the eyes. Actually LISTEN to them.
There is far too little of this, and way too much entering things on a computer. I had one doctor I am pretty sure was playing World of Warcr

Temujin said...

The idea behind the more complex AI medical systems is to free the doctor up so that he/she can actually look at their patent's face. Look them in the eyes. Actually LISTEN to them.
There is far too little of this, and way too much entering things on a computer. I had one doctor I am pretty sure was playing World of Warcraft while I was talking with him.
The better AI systems not only help the doc take notes, they actually are like assistants, offering other diagnoses, or other questions to ask the patient. And then...it rolls up the medical history, pushes billing, interfaces with the office and insurance.

They are not only here to stay, but will become more and more a part of our medical care.

Yes- I do worry about doctors giving over diagnoses completely to AI, or just hanging out while AI does its thing. But I guess it's like it's always been: You have to shop for a good doctor. Always to your own homework and don't be afraid to question your doctor- to his face. (not on the side to your friends).

Eva Marie said...

@Angie: I would recommend Perplexity
1.Real time search and cites every source
2. It routes tasks to the best AI model for the job - Claude, GPT, Gemini, and others - automatically. You’re not locked into one model’s strengths and weaknesses.
3. Remembers you across all sessions
4. I mainly use it to track my food, supplements. Makes excellent suggestions.
5. Is not as rah rah as other AIs
6. Loves putting everything in tables - very easy to understand data when it’s organized this way.

Eva Marie said...

sorry, that was @aggie. I blame spell check

Josephbleau said...

Everyone knows that taking your own notes by hand is the best way to take a class, reading someone else’s notes just does not make it work. It’s a mental physical process.

We are at an interesting point in ai now. We have people on the job who have never used ai before, it’s very new. So we have experts using ai that can judge it and compensate for vague and incorrect output. The next generation will be disconnected from the cycle further by not even having the comfort of doing the job by hand, and will just trust the computations more. No one will spend a lot of time learning mental or hand calculations if the ai can supply answers faster.

So our new frontiers will be explored less by in depth performers, and more by people on the outside observing what the machines are doing. Professional education needs to double down on workflows and processes and make sure they don’t drop standards. People still need to do before they manage.

Kirk Parker said...

Josephbleau,

I took HS chemistry and physics back in the days of slide rules. The only way to be successful in that endeavor was to have a very good idea of what the order of magnitude was expected in the result.

One of my college roommates was on some kind of engineering track; he owned the first HP 35 calculator I ever saw. He (and I) we're well prepped to use advanced tools like that because we had the mental concept to catch when something went wrong, like accidentally putting a decimal point in the wrong place when inputting data. The sort of inexperienced users that you are talking about will have no such abilities.

Post a Comment

Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith. Also: No italics, even briefly. Use asterisks for emphasis. And don't play with the format by changing fonts or using boldface or all caps. Never include more than one extra line break between paragraphs.