jordan pulse -

The question may sound closer to science fiction, but today it is being seriously raised within one of the most prominent medical journals in the world: JAMA.
​The concept that has sparked global debate can be summarized as follows: If artificial intelligence has become capable of reading medical tests, analyzing X-rays, suggesting diagnoses, and participating in medical decision-making, is it enough to treat it merely as "computer software"?
​A number of top experts in medicine and technology ethics believe the answer is no longer that simple. Instead, they propose a future where medical AI could undergo a path identical to that of a human physician. This would include exams similar to the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE), specialized tests like the Board, and a supervised "residency training period" under the oversight of doctors before being permitted broad clinical participation.
​Most interestingly, the proposal does not speak of a traditional technical approval—as is the case with current applications and programs—but rather of a time-limited "practice license" that requires continuous renewal, performance monitoring, and evaluations for errors and medical safety.
​In other words, we may one day reach a stage where medical artificial intelligence is treated more like a "supervised intelligent medical assistant" rather than just an electronic program.
​Yet, despite this stunning development, the most critical question remains: Can a machine understand a human the way a doctor does?
​Medicine is not just numbers and diagnoses; it is experience, intuition, responsibility, humanity, and the reassurance given to a patient who sometimes seeks a word of comfort before medicine.
​Perhaps for this reason, and despite all the progress, the world is still speaking of "artificial intelligence under the supervision of a doctor" and not "instead of a doctor."
​JAMA Opinion Article / HealthExec