You seem to be assuming that a different payment model would reduce diagnostic errors. There is no evidence for that. Anything related to biology is necessarily probabilistic and highly error prone. Some care quality improvements are certainly possible but those aren't necessarily tied to payment models. It's more important to focus on evidence-based clinical practice guidelines.
>You seem to be assuming that a different payment model would reduce diagnostic errors.
No. The payment model should change to be fair, I never said the payment reduces diagnostic errors. The patient should be informed about the probabilistic nature of the diagnosis. A contract (not in fine print) to protect the doctor from lawsuits from misdiagnosis should be signed by the patient to reflect this. Then the payment should be Heavily reduced to reflect the unreliability of the diagnosis. By heavily I mean becoming a doctor should not be a profession that is associated with extreme wealth because the unreliability of their diagnosis/treatment does not convey that level of value.
>Some care quality improvements are certainly possible but those aren't necessarily tied to payment models.
I don't think it's "some" quality improvements. The US has some of the worst outcomes in the 1st world in terms of quality of care. There are massive improvements that can be made here.
>It's more important to focus on evidence-based clinical practice guidelines.
Agreed, and until the evidence, clinical practice guidelines and effectiveness of doctors rises to the level of significant reliability, both payment and respect should be adjusted to reflect the current level of low reliability.
