And it will be like shooting fish in a barrel.
It is said that doctors spend a lot of their time on bullshit computer procedures, involving garbage software, when they should be seeing patients or learning something.
1) privacy and other laws have high demand of "structured" and "secure" information keeping ("it's a law that I must fill this information into this BS table and it's 100 BS fields");
2) governments love to spend the money on "standalone" software that has 1000 BS requirements... And contact companies do love to make that software as BS as they can because the worse system it is, the more additional contracts do they get to solve the problems they made.
Basically, I am sceptical that anything could help medical staff. (I am pessimistic because of what I see in my country of Lithuania. Barely working proprietary systems ("e-sveikata" and "e-receptai") that costs tax payers hundreds of millions Euros.)
Why do you think so?
I see a huge thorny ball of legal issues that needs to be resolved before gpt-like services can really become useful...
I personally feel very held back by legal (and infosec) uncertainty. I would use chatgpt a lot more of it didn't feel so legally sticky (?).
To everyone else it's turning data over to a 3rd party but for them it's like running scapy.
They can't train on one customer's data and use it on another but that's less of an issue than you'd think.