The avian influenza virus H5N1 has only turned up in two humans in the U.S., but its recent spread to dairy cattle has some experts on at least slightly elevated alert.
The past four years have witnessed major advancements in medical science’s drive to unravel the complexities of the human immune system. We have the COVID-19 pandemic to thank for much of the progress.
Scientists are people too. As such, when engaged in research projects using AI, they must resist the very human impulse to over-delegate tasks to algorithms.
Hospital patients who test positive for Clostridioides difficile immediately upon admission but show no symptoms are highly unlikely to spread the germ to other inpatients.
Researchers at the University of Illinois Chicago have developed an elective course that can quickly transform fourth-year medical students from functional AI novices to budding AI experts.
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is setting up seven new institutes for studying foundational AI. Two of the initiatives have healthcare as a prime focus.
Every industry on earth is buzzing over the promise and potential of ChatGPT and similarly sharp AI models, whether “large language” or another generative form. Healthcare is no exception. But shouldn’t it be?
Half a year after President Biden officially directed federal agencies in the executive branch’s bailiwick to “seize the promise and manage the risks” of AI, the White House has posted a status report.
U.S. physicians often receive payments from medical device manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies. New research in JAMA found a connection between receiving such payments and using specific devices—should the industry be concerned?
Five of the largest U.S. medical societies focused on cardiovascular health are one step closer to seeing their paradigm-shifting proposal become a reality.
