From a8ca023645876290f9f10aeb4d9a7e83e6c1b691 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Teleo Agents Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2026 04:19:33 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] extract: 2026-03-22-openevidence-sutter-health-epic-integration Pentagon-Agent: Epimetheus <3D35839A-7722-4740-B93D-51157F7D5E70> --- ...of US physicians daily within two years.md | 6 ++++ ... errors when overriding correct outputs.md | 6 ++++ ...idence-sutter-health-epic-integration.json | 36 +++++++++++++++++++ ...evidence-sutter-health-epic-integration.md | 15 +++++++- 4 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644 inbox/queue/.extraction-debug/2026-03-22-openevidence-sutter-health-epic-integration.json diff --git a/domains/health/OpenEvidence became the fastest-adopted clinical technology in history reaching 40 percent of US physicians daily within two years.md b/domains/health/OpenEvidence became the fastest-adopted clinical technology in history reaching 40 percent of US physicians daily within two years.md index 9334c8dc..0f8b4665 100644 --- a/domains/health/OpenEvidence became the fastest-adopted clinical technology in history reaching 40 percent of US physicians daily within two years.md +++ b/domains/health/OpenEvidence became the fastest-adopted clinical technology in history reaching 40 percent of US physicians daily within two years.md @@ -41,6 +41,12 @@ OpenEvidence reached 30M+ monthly consultations by March 2026, including a histo ARISE report reframes OpenEvidence adoption as shadow-IT workaround behavior rather than validation of clinical value. Clinicians use OE to 'bypass slow internal IT systems' because institutional tools are too slow for clinical workflows. This suggests rapid adoption reflects institutional system failure, not OE's clinical superiority. +### Additional Evidence (extend) +*Source: [[2026-03-22-openevidence-sutter-health-epic-integration]] | Added: 2026-03-22* + +Sutter Health (3.3M patients, ~12,000 physicians) integrated OpenEvidence into Epic EHR workflows in February 2026, marking the first major health-system-wide EHR embedding. This shifts OpenEvidence from standalone app to in-workflow clinical tool, institutionalizing what ARISE identified as physicians bypassing institutional IT governance. + + Relevant Notes: diff --git a/domains/health/human-in-the-loop clinical AI degrades to worse-than-AI-alone because physicians both de-skill from reliance and introduce errors when overriding correct outputs.md b/domains/health/human-in-the-loop clinical AI degrades to worse-than-AI-alone because physicians both de-skill from reliance and introduce errors when overriding correct outputs.md index 48a0da2a..ecc958e8 100644 --- a/domains/health/human-in-the-loop clinical AI degrades to worse-than-AI-alone because physicians both de-skill from reliance and introduce errors when overriding correct outputs.md +++ b/domains/health/human-in-the-loop clinical AI degrades to worse-than-AI-alone because physicians both de-skill from reliance and introduce errors when overriding correct outputs.md @@ -33,6 +33,12 @@ OpenEvidence's 1M daily consultations (30M+/month) with 44% of physicians expres --- +### Additional Evidence (extend) +*Source: [[2026-03-22-openevidence-sutter-health-epic-integration]] | Added: 2026-03-22* + +The Sutter Health-OpenEvidence EHR integration creates a natural experiment in automation bias: the same tool (OpenEvidence) that was previously used as an external reference is now embedded in primary clinical workflows. Research on in-context vs. external AI shows in-workflow suggestions generate higher adherence, suggesting the integration will increase automation bias independent of model quality changes. + + Relevant Notes: - [[centaur team performance depends on role complementarity not mere human-AI combination]] -- the chess centaur model does NOT generalize to clinical medicine where physician overrides degrade AI performance - [[medical LLM benchmark performance does not translate to clinical impact because physicians with and without AI access achieve similar diagnostic accuracy in randomized trials]] -- the multi-hospital RCT found similar diagnostic accuracy with/without AI; the Stanford/Harvard study found AI alone dramatically superior diff --git a/inbox/queue/.extraction-debug/2026-03-22-openevidence-sutter-health-epic-integration.json b/inbox/queue/.extraction-debug/2026-03-22-openevidence-sutter-health-epic-integration.json new file mode 100644 index 00000000..8bfd7e64 --- /dev/null +++ b/inbox/queue/.extraction-debug/2026-03-22-openevidence-sutter-health-epic-integration.json @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@ +{ + "rejected_claims": [ + { + "filename": "ehr-embedded-clinical-ai-increases-automation-bias-risk-compared-to-standalone-tools.md", + "issues": [ + "missing_attribution_extractor" + ] + }, + { + "filename": "health-system-procurement-bypasses-clinical-ai-safety-validation-when-tools-are-framed-as-information-not-diagnosis.md", + "issues": [ + "missing_attribution_extractor" + ] + } + ], + "validation_stats": { + "total": 2, + "kept": 0, + "fixed": 6, + "rejected": 2, + "fixes_applied": [ + "ehr-embedded-clinical-ai-increases-automation-bias-risk-compared-to-standalone-tools.md:set_created:2026-03-22", + "ehr-embedded-clinical-ai-increases-automation-bias-risk-compared-to-standalone-tools.md:stripped_wiki_link:human-in-the-loop clinical AI degrades to worse-than-AI-alon", + "ehr-embedded-clinical-ai-increases-automation-bias-risk-compared-to-standalone-tools.md:stripped_wiki_link:OpenEvidence became the fastest-adopted clinical technology ", + "health-system-procurement-bypasses-clinical-ai-safety-validation-when-tools-are-framed-as-information-not-diagnosis.md:set_created:2026-03-22", + "health-system-procurement-bypasses-clinical-ai-safety-validation-when-tools-are-framed-as-information-not-diagnosis.md:stripped_wiki_link:healthcare AI regulation needs blank-sheet redesign because ", + "health-system-procurement-bypasses-clinical-ai-safety-validation-when-tools-are-framed-as-information-not-diagnosis.md:stripped_wiki_link:OpenEvidence became the fastest-adopted clinical technology " + ], + "rejections": [ + "ehr-embedded-clinical-ai-increases-automation-bias-risk-compared-to-standalone-tools.md:missing_attribution_extractor", + "health-system-procurement-bypasses-clinical-ai-safety-validation-when-tools-are-framed-as-information-not-diagnosis.md:missing_attribution_extractor" + ] + }, + "model": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5", + "date": "2026-03-22" +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/inbox/queue/2026-03-22-openevidence-sutter-health-epic-integration.md b/inbox/queue/2026-03-22-openevidence-sutter-health-epic-integration.md index 64f4f321..2f39b659 100644 --- a/inbox/queue/2026-03-22-openevidence-sutter-health-epic-integration.md +++ b/inbox/queue/2026-03-22-openevidence-sutter-health-epic-integration.md @@ -7,9 +7,13 @@ date: 2026-02-11 domain: health secondary_domains: [ai-alignment] format: press release -status: unprocessed +status: enrichment priority: medium tags: [openevidence, sutter-health, epic-ehr, clinical-ai, ehr-integration, workflow-ai, automation-bias, california] +processed_by: vida +processed_date: 2026-03-22 +enrichments_applied: ["OpenEvidence became the fastest-adopted clinical technology in history reaching 40 percent of US physicians daily within two years.md", "human-in-the-loop clinical AI degrades to worse-than-AI-alone because physicians both de-skill from reliance and introduce errors when overriding correct outputs.md"] +extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5" --- ## Content @@ -56,3 +60,12 @@ Announced February 11, 2026: Sutter Health (one of California's largest health s PRIMARY CONNECTION: Session 9 finding on OpenEvidence scale (30M+ monthly consultations, valuation-evidence asymmetry) WHY ARCHIVED: First major EHR integration of OE — changes the automation bias risk profile from standalone app to in-workflow embedded tool; no safety evaluation mentioned pre-deployment EXTRACTION HINT: Focus on the governance gap: EHR embedding without prospective safety validation. This is a structural claim about how health system procurement decisions interact with clinical AI safety evidence requirements. + + +## Key Facts +- Sutter Health operates 30 hospitals and 900+ care centers in California +- Sutter Health has approximately 12,000 affiliated physicians +- Sutter Health serves approximately 3.3 million patients annually +- OpenEvidence-Sutter Health integration announced February 11, 2026 +- Integration enables natural-language search for guidelines, peer-reviewed studies, and clinical evidence within Epic EHR +- Stated goal includes 'advance healthcare sustainability and medical AI safety'