This work is with a team of medical and technology experts I am lucky to collaborate with: Zehavi Kugler, Lior Hayat, Tamar Brufman, Ran Ilan Ber, Keren Leibovich, Tom Beer, Ilan Frank, Ran Shaul (KHealth) Caroline Goldzweig, and Joshua Pevnick (Cedars-Sinai Medical Center).

AI excelled at guideline adherence (e.g., no antibiotics for viral URI) & incorporating EHR data (e.g., noticing recurrent UTI history that physicians missed). Physicians did better when patient narratives evolved or when visual findings were important.

Overall scores were equal in 68% of cases, better for AI in 21%, and better for physicians in 11% (these are actual physician decisions in urgent care cases with common symptoms - not medschool exams or vignettes)

AI recommendations were rated optimal in 77% of cases vs 67% for physicians, and potentially harmful in 2.8% vs 4.6% for physicians.

We sampled 461 adult visits from one month in 2024 with respiratory, urinary, vaginal, eye, & dental symptoms - which in previous work showed had high AI-clinician diagnostic concordance; symptoms represent 2/3 of clinic volume. www.mcpdigitalhealth.org/article/S294...

The setting is CS-Connect, a telemedicine clinic where AI first automates patient intake via structured chat. AI predicts the differential diagnoses and recommends Rx, labs & referrals. Physicians then conduct a video visit.

New @annalsofim.bsky.social paper: In 461 @cedarssinai.bsky.social virtual urgent care cases with common symptoms, AI recommendations were rated optimal more often than physicians' (77% vs 67%), & less often potentially harmful (2.8% vs 4.6%).

AGI is coming in 2 years max