Maybe we should just give up on privacy for medical records and require that all prescriptions, tests, symptoms, etc. are thrown into a large database where they can be analyzed.
Then approval is given for X number of patients, when hypothesis is defined. And further approval follows automatically as long as on-the-fly analysis of all health records supports the hypothesis.
Okay, I'm naive, and we integrating all health records is certainly non-trivial. My point is every prescription is an experiment that could be used as further evidence.
Any time you care about the results of a set of actions, you should measure those results. If we care about the results of medical care, we should measure those results.
It's irresponsible not to. I would venture to guess that millions of people are dying early because we don't have this as a mandatory, built in part of the process.
But let's put this in terms of not just science but economics. A working market depends on having information about the normalized value of a particular proposition. To understand that value, you need to know the proposition's cost and its benefit. Insurance and other systems remove us from information about cost. Throwing away results data obscures the benefit. Is it any shock then that prices spiral out of control?
Then approval is given for X number of patients, when hypothesis is defined. And further approval follows automatically as long as on-the-fly analysis of all health records supports the hypothesis.
Okay, I'm naive, and we integrating all health records is certainly non-trivial. My point is every prescription is an experiment that could be used as further evidence.