What Would You Do?
1.Your financial adviser wants you to allow his firm to manage your funds using a robo-investment adviser—an artificial intelligence software product that will constantly monitor your account 24 × 7 and make investment decisions consistent with your financial goals and the level of risk with which you are comfortable. The services fee will be reduced from your current 1.25 percent per year of total assets to 0.75 percent per year. What questions would you ask to decide if robo-investing was right for you?
Ans: Develop the problem Statement: To define the problem, the problem statement should be clear with ad hoc representation of the issues that is to be addressed. So a problem statement is the one that answers the following questions: How many people aware about Artificial Intelligence and its Manpower? Whether all the people (patients) belong to urban area to understand enough about Robot? In my administration, what is the impact of diseases caused by peoples? Whether people accept to consult with a Robotic physician even for General Checkup According to being a member of administrative staff, in this fastening world, all the urban peoples surely care about Robot and they consult with him, to avoid standing in a queue similar to consult with a Human Living Physician.
Identify alternate decisions: To implement an alternative decision in a practical, remember about the old age, the illiterate and physically handicapped patients. They need the following guidance to consult with the Robotic Physician: Must appoint trusted personnel for guiding the blind and deaf patients in giving the input parameters to the Robot. Personnel must be a well impressing person with patience to guide the disables person in order to offer a better hospitality.
Evaluation of the alternative: It is the decision making step to validate the guidelines, rules and regulations that are required for a successful implement of Robot. Whether the resources such as man, cost, time and effort could be sufficient to implement this scenario. Have the Robotic physician would act as a brain storming doctor for all the patients’ cyclonically. Need to use the common approaches in ethical decision making that suits to achieve more optimal decisions. In all dimensions that satisfies the above criteria will do for successful deployment of Robotic Physician
Implement the decision Made: Implementing the decision is the process of converting the existing (older decisions) that is dealing directly to the human physician to the proposed newer Robotic physicians implementation decisions. This can be done by identifying the pros and cons of existing decision and benefits of proposed decision. Nothing is permanent, only change is permanent in this world. To resemble to this statements, all the stake holders in a business or patients in the hospitals are dynamic. So, word of mouth is the only fact that can brainstorm or make a state of transition in the implementation can be done in efficient, effective and timely manner.
Evaluation of Results: The following evaluation test can be conducted in the resultant Robot. Probably the deployment of Robotic physician in Real time is met with any negative consequences. Patients are really satisfied by Robot physician. Is any discrepancy among the course of actions, medications, diagnosis and suggested specialist. Is the Robot Physician is consistent enough in knowing to handle various diseases? Whether any refinement or some incremental development needs to enhance the Robotic behavior? Is it excellent in doing services to patients and easy to maintain?
4. You have volunteered to lead a group of local citizens in approaching the board of directors of the nearest hospital (55 miles away) about establishing remote monitoring of 25 or so chronically ill people in your small community in Alaska. How would you convince the board to support your community? What sort of facts do you need to gather to support your case? What specific services and support would you request?
Ans: Identify what sort of illness mostly people have: First of all the leader must be aware of his objective. So he must be clear enough to state the need for implementing a remote monitoring system. He must possess a good system study to face the board of directors.
Identify the alternate need for the system: Now a day in this fast world, people always wants to go fast in their everyday routine work. In case of chronicle illness, people tends to be take rest and they never be strained to go in a physical way. The idea of implementing remote monitoring system in this case is a reasonable one. It can be stated to the board of directors in a legible way.
Evaluating the remote monitoring system: A proposal can be made and forwarded to the BOD stating the reasons for the implementing the newly systems by the following parameters: At present chronicle affiliation illness makes the people to death, though the hospital is far away 55 Kilometers from the affected patients area. They are unable to walk or come by a vehicle during mid-night. In some cases they may be unconscious to do their work. They must always take bed rest
Implementing the Remote System: Getting approval for the given proposal person needs to deploy it in real time. He needs to judge the system is working efficiently and effectively by conducting a mock up session with the patients. Finally it is noted that whether any enhancement changes or adaptation needed for the same. If so, change it and again implement it. And collect the feedback from the patients and physicians.
Evaluation of the resultant system: After a month get the questionnaire and circulate to the area where this system works. Collect the degree of efficiency that how many patients are recovered from their illness by using this system. Make a comparison by representing it in a bar chart. If it is 100% success continues it otherwise go for another incremental decision’s.
5. You are a midlevel manager at a major metropolitan hospital and are responsible for capturing and reporting statistics regarding the cost and quality of patient care. You believe in a strict interpretation when defining various reportable incidents; as a result, your hospital’s rating on a number of quality issues has declined during the six months you have held the position. Your predecessor was more lenient and was inclined to let minor incidents go unreported or to classify some serious incidents as less serious. The quarterly quality meeting is next week, and you know that your reporting will be challenged by the chief of staff and other members of the quality review board. How should you prepare for this meeting? Should you defend your strict reporting procedures or revert to the former reporting process for the “sake of consistency in the numbers,” as several people have urged?
Ans: Identify the problem in the statistic report: As someone was in the designation of a middle level manager in a famous metropolitan hospital, he used to monitor the pitfalls of the hospital beyond the scope of cost and quality. The various services that are the serving people such as nurses, tutors, attenders and the persons who are involved in housekeeping in the hospital are the backbone of the good quality of the hospital. Apart from these, Doctors are the God who can persistently keep the name of the hospital. He used to analyses whether each service hands in the hospital are honestly serving the patient needs. If there is some problem in the serving hands, analyses the problem that is whether the problem is in cost or resource or scarcity of labors.
Gathering the alternative report based on statistics: Next to the problem statement, he used to analyses whether any alternative decision can be made to the following facts: Reason for the decline of quality issues in the last six months. During the last six months who are the patients made a checkup or consulted in our hospital. What are the types of diseases affects the number of patients in that stipulated period? In those intervals what, are the medicines we supplied from our hospital? Can the medicine items are effective irrespective of its side effects?
Evaluation of alternatives based on statistical survey: Alternatives in the sense, collecting the opinions as per the following requirements: Spreading the questionnaires to the local peoples and taking a blue print of the people’s expectation in the hospital. Is there is any rules and regulations of the hospital is violating the rules of government and politicians in that place? All the framed policies, rules and regulations of the hospital don’t violate our government and others.
Implementing the right decision at the right time of the quality meeting: Collecting the overall statistical reports thereby simultaneously collecting the reason for how the hospital was inclined in the past days and reporting the following reasons to the QRB-Quality Review Board. Reporting the climatic change in the six months that’s why tremendous variations in the decline of the hospital. The change of disease pattern during the last six months. Explaining the revolutionary change in the disease pattern. Increase in the cost of medicine in the affected time. Decrease in the hygienic environment due to overheat or summer season may be considered.
Evaluating the above stated Reasons as the final results for decline in quality: As seen in the above stated facts, as someone is the manager, the mind, body temperature, blood pressure and sugar, vitamins and salt content level in the body of the human is not stagnant at all times. And also the climatic conditions due to deforestation very quickly affect the persons or patients with low immunity. So as because of all these natural changes and the dynamics of human nature leads to the decline in the rate on number of quality. He will say to the QRB that the above stated facts are the reason for the decline of quality of the hospital. There is no YES or NO decision here. Only YES to start from the beginning. It can be improved again by repeating the steps from the beginning that’s what he said.
Critical Thinking Question
Case 1: IBM Watson—Not Yet Ready for Prime Time
1. As noted in the case, the OEA pilot system was tested in 2015 and was able to suggest the same treatment plan as MD Anderson physicians on 90 percent of select cases. Should MD Anderson accept this degree of accuracy? How should it determine an acceptable level of accuracy for such a system?
I think the MD Anderson should accept this degree of accuracy. It should consider many sides of affecting matters.
2. What key learnings did MD Anderson gain from this effort that may influence future efforts?
In my opinion, the Key Learning that MD Anderson gained was that the data should be compatible for a smoother flow of the project and should have clear and straight focus on what the requirement is.
3. Should MD Anderson personnel have known that in choosing a new health-records system they would need to restart the entire OEA project? If so, what factors may have caused them to make this choice?
MD Anderson personnel should have known that in choosing a new health-records system that they would need to restart the entire OEA project. The factors that might have been responsible are that they might have gotten hopeless since the product was a fail, second switching the data that is easy to read might have been an easier choice. The factor: they want to make a better improvement.
Case 2: Sophia Genetics Moves Precision Medicine Ahead
1. What advantages does the Sophia DDM system have compared to the approach attempted by MD Anderson, as described in the previous case? Which approach do you believe has the greater potential for success in the long run? Why?
The advantages of Sophia DDM system over MD Anderson is that The Sophia Genetics first extracts the patients DNA from the blood and processes to determine the sequence then they finally places the DNA info to into the software which then does all the work. They have a human to computer system so that the data is entered properly compare to MD Anderson who wasn’t the data to be converted that is stored from the past and that's the issue. I think Sophia’s system has a better approach and has greater potential for success in the long run as the data will be stored over and over again and the database and the link will get bigger and wider for them to diagnose and pinpoint the Cancer type and help fight it.
2. The creation of a patient database shared among hospitals globally raises concerns about patient privacy. How might Sophia DDM address this concern?
There is definitely a privacy for patient in terms of sharing the database among hospitals globally, the agreement with Sophia and other hospital should be that it won’t be disclosed in public, but just between doctors. This is crucial because it will save the privacy and guess what life is very important too over privacy to find cure.
3. Do research to determine whether or not the Sophia DDM technology improved patient outcomes, lowered costs, or provided some other benefit. Document your findings in a brief paragraph or two.
The Sophia DDM technology improved patient outcomes, lowered costs, or provided some other benefits.
I found this information through the https://www.sophiagenetics.com/en_US/hospitals/sophia-ddm/sophia-ddmr-details.html