Free EMR Thoughts Newsletter Want to receive the latest EMR Thoughts, Healthcare IT happenings, and EMR Market trends sent straight to your email? Join thousands of healthcare pros who subscribe to EMR Thoughts for FREE!

CMS Announces Details for MACRA, MIPS, APM – The Future of Meaningful Use

Seven years ago, Congress passed a law to spur the country to digitize the health care experience for Americans and connect doctors’ practices and hospitals, thereby modernizing patient care through the Electronic Health Records (EHRs) Incentive Programs, also known as “Meaningful Use.” Before this shift began, many providers did not have the capital to invest in health information technology and patient information was siloed in paper records. Since then, we have made incredible progress, with nearly all hospitals and three-quarters of doctors using EHRs. Through the use of health information technology, we are seeing some of the benefits from early applications like safe and accurate prescriptions sent electronically to pharmacies and lab results available from home. But, as many doctors and patients will tell you (and have told us), we remain a long way from fully realizing the potential of these important tools to improve care and health.

That is why, as we mentioned earlier this year, we have conducted a review of the Meaningful Use Program for Medicare physicians as part of our implementation of the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA), with the aim of reconsidering the program so we could move closer to achieving the full potential health IT offers.

Over the last several months, we have made an unprecedented commitment to listening to and learning from physicians and patients about their experience with health information technology – both the positive and negative. We spoke with over 6,000 stakeholders across the country, including clinicians and patients, in a variety of local communities. Today, based on that feedback, we are proposing to incorporate the program in to the Merit-based Payment System (MIPS) in a way that makes it more patient-centricpractice-driven and focused on connectivity. This new program within MIPS is named Advancing Care Information.

What We’ve Learned

In our extensive sessions and workshops with stakeholders, a near-universal vision of health information technology surfaced: Physicians, patients, and other clinicians collaborating on patient care by sharing and building on relevant information.

Three central priorities to address moving forward:

  1. Improved interoperability and the ability of physicians and patients to easily move and receive information from other physician’s systems;
  2. Increased flexibility in the Meaningful Use program; and
  3. User-friendly technology designed around how a physician works and interacts with patients.

This feedback created a blueprint for how we go forward to replace the Meaningful Use program for Medicare physicians with a more flexible, outcome-oriented and less burdensome proposal.

How We’re Moving Forward

Our goal with Advancing Care Information is to support the vision of a simpler, more connected, less burdensome technology. Compared to the existing Medicare Meaningful Use program for physicians, the new approach increases flexibility, reduces burden, and improves patient outcomes because it would:

  • Allow physicians and other clinicians to choose to select the measures that reflect how technology best suits their day-to-day practice
  • Simplify the process for achievement and provide multiple paths for success
  • Align with the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology’s 2015 Edition Health IT Certification Criteria
  • Emphasize interoperability, information exchange, and security measures and require patients to access to their health information through of APIs
  • Simplify reporting by no longer requiring all-or-nothing EHR measurement or quality reporting
  • Reduce reporting to a single public health immunization registry
  • Reduce the number of measures to an all-time low of 11 measures, down from 18 measures, and no longer require reporting on the Clinical Decision Support and the Computerized Provider Order Entry measures
  • Exempt certain physicians from reporting when EHR technology is less applicable to their practice and allow physicians to report as a group

A full list of the operational differences included in this new proposal is available here, along with more details on how it would work.

These improvements should increase providers’ ability to use technology in ways that are more relevant to their needs and the needs of their patients. Previously established requirements for APIs in the newly certified technology will open up the physician desktop to allow apps, analytic tools, and medical devices to plug and play. Through this new direction, we look forward to developers and entrepreneurs taking the opportunity to design around the everyday needs of users, rather than designing a one-size-fits-all approach. Already, developers that provide over 90 percent of electronic health records used by U.S. hospitals have made public commitments to make it easier for individuals to access their own data; not block information; and speak the same language. CMS and ONC will continue to use our authorities to eliminate barriers to interoperability.

Under the new law, Advancing Care Information would affect only Medicare payments to physician offices, not Medicare hospitals or Medicaid programs. We are already meeting with hospitals to discuss potential opportunities to align the programs to best serve clinicians and patients, and will be engaging with Medicaid stakeholders as well.

This proposal, if finalized, would replace the current Meaningful Use program and reporting would begin January 1, 2017, along with the other components of the Quality Payment Program. Over the next 60 days, the proposal will be available for public comment. It is summarized here http://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2016/04/27/administration-takes-first-step-implement-legislation-modernizing-how-medicare-pays-physicians.html  and the full text is available here https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2016-10032.pdf . We will continually revise and improve the program as we gather feedback from patients and physicians providing and receiving care under the Advancing Care Information category – and the Quality Payment Program as a whole. We look forward to hearing from you and working together to continue making progress in the coming months and years.

April 27, 2016 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

Providers Must Attest to 2015 EHR Incentive Program Requirements by March 11, 2016 at 11:59 PM EST

The attestation deadline for the Medicare Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Program is only 3 days away!

Eligible professionals, eligible hospitals, and critical access hospitals (CAHs) participating in the Medicare EHR Incentive Program must attest using the Medicare & Medicaid EHR Incentive Program Registration and Attestation System no later than Friday, March 11, 2016 at 11:59 p.m. ET.

Medicaid EHR Incentive Program participants should refer to their respective states for attestation information and deadlines. Certain Medicaid eligible professionals may use the Registration and Attestation System as an alternate attestation method to avoid the Medicare payment adjustment (80 FR 62900 through 62901).

To attest to the EHR Incentive Programs in 2015:

  • Eligible Professionals may select an EHR reporting period of any continuous 90 days from January 1, 2015 (the start of the 2015 calendar year) through December 31, 2015.
  • Eligible Hospitals/CAHs may select an EHR reporting period of any continuous 90 days from October 1, 2014 (the start of the federal fiscal year) through December 31, 2015.
March 8, 2016 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

CMS Launches Important Changes to the Medicare EHR Incentive Program Hardship Exception Process

Today, CMS launched important changes to the Medicare EHR Incentive Program hardship exception process that will reduce burden on clinicians, hospitals, and critical access hospitals (CAHs). These changes are a result of recent Medicare legislation – the Patient Access and Medicare Protection Act (PAMPA), Pub. L. No. 114-115 – and our ongoing efforts to improve the program.

CMS has posted new, streamlined hardship applications, reducing the amount of information that eligible professionals (EPs), eligible hospitals, and CAHs must submit to apply for an exception. The new applications and instructions for a hardship exception from the Medicare Electronic Health Records Incentive Program 2017 payment adjustment are available here.

This new, streamlined application process is the result of PAMPA, which established that the Secretary may consider hardship exceptions for “categories” of EPs, eligible hospitals, and CAHs that were identified on CMS’ website as of December 15, 2015. Prior to this law, CMS was required to review all applications on a “case-by-case” basis.

Importantly, EPs, eligible hospitals, and CAHs that wish to use the streamlined application must submit their application according to the timeline established in PAMPA:

  • Eligible Professionals: March 15, 2016
  • Eligible Hospitals & CAHs: April 1, 2016

Please note: CAHs should use the form specific for the CAH hardship exceptions related to an EHR reporting period in 2015. CAHs that have already submitted a form for 2015 are not required to resubmit.

In addition, we have heard from stakeholders that they would like a more efficient approach for submitting applications from groups of providers. Following Congress’ efforts in PAMPA, we have reviewed our administrative authorities and determined that groups of providers may apply for a hardship exception on a single application. Under the group application, multiple providers and provider types may apply together using a single submission. The hardship exception categories are the same as those applicable for the individual provider application.

Providers will have the option to submit an electronic file (in excel or csv formats) with all National Provider Identifiers (NPIs) or CMS Certification Numbers (CCNs) for providers within the group or use a multiple NPI or CCN form to submit their application. In addition, facilities which include both inpatient and outpatient settings may include both the individual NPIs for any eligible professionals and the CCN for the eligible hospitals and CAHs on the same single submission for their organization.

We look forward to further simplifying and continuing to improve the EHR Incentive Programs in collaboration with the provider community and Congress.

January 22, 2016 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

Submit Applications for EHR Penalty Reconsiderations by November 30

In the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), Congress mandated that payment adjustments should be applied to Medicare eligible professionals, eligible hospitals, and critical access hospitals (CAH) that are not meaningful users of Certified Electronic Health Record (EHR) Technology under the Medicare EHR Incentive Program. Payment adjustments for eligible hospitals began on October 1, 2014.

2016 Payment Adjustments for Medicare Eligible Hospitals
Eligible hospitals receive the Medicare payment adjustment amount that is tied to a specific fiscal year. For fiscal year 2016, Medicare eligible hospitals that were not meaningful EHR users in 2014, and were not granted a hardship exception, were subject to a payment adjustment beginning October 1, 2015. This payment adjustment is applied as a reduction to the applicable percentage increase to the Inpatient Prospective Payment System (IPPS) payment rate, thus reducing the update to the IPPS standardized amount for these hospitals.

2016 Reconsiderations Application Due November 30
For eligible hospitals who received a Medicare payment adjustment letter for 2016, and believe their hospital was subject to a payment adjustment in error, applications for payment adjustment reconsideration for fiscal year 2016 must be submitted electronically or postmarked by 11:59 PM EST on November 30.

The instructions and application for a payment adjustment reconsideration are available on the Payment Adjustments & Hardship Information page of the CMS website.

November 24, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

Additional FAQs for Guidance on Meeting Public Health Objective for 2015 EHR Reporting Period

On October 6, CMS released the final rule for the Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Programs. To support provider participation in 2015, CMS has released two additional FAQs in response to inquiries about the public health reporting objective in 2015.

FAQ 13409
Question: For 2015, how should a provider report on the public health reporting objective if they had planned to be in Stage 1 meaningful use which required sending a test message and continued submission if successful, but did not require registration of intent?

Answer: We did not intend to require providers to engage in new activities during 2015, which may not be feasible after the publication of the final rule in order to successfully demonstrate meaningful use in 2015. Since providers in Stage 1 in 2015 were not previously required to submit a registration of intent to submit data to meet Objective 10 measures, providers may meet the measures by having sent a test message or by being in production. Providers who have sent a test message can be considered to have met Option 2 of Active Engagement – Test and Validation; providers who are in production can be considered to have met Option 3 of Active Engagement – Production.

FAQ 13413
Question: Does integration of the PDMP (Prescription Drug Monitoring Program) into an EHR count as a specialized registry?

Answer: If the PDMP within a jurisdiction has declared itself a specialized registry ready to accept data, then the integration with a PDMP can count towards a specialized registry. The EHR must be CEHRT, but there are no standards for the exchange of data.

November 17, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

New EHR Incentive Program FAQs from CMS

On October 6, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released the final rule with comment for the Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Programs. To keep you informed of changes to the programs and how to participate in 2015, CMS has also released three new FAQs providing clarification on how to attest to certain measures for health information exchange, patient electronic access, and other objectives that require patient action.

FAQ 12817
Question: For the Health Information Exchange objective for meaningful use in 2015 through 2017, may an eligible professional (EP), eligible hospital or critical access hospital (CAH) count a transition of care or referral in its numerator for the measure if they electronically create and send a summary of care document using their CEHRT to a third party organization that plays a role in determining the next provider of care and ultimately delivers the summary of care document?

Answer: Yes. An EP, eligible hospital or CAH may count transmissions in this measure’s numerator when a third party organization is involved so long as:

  • The summary of care document is created using certified EHR technology (CEHRT);
  • The summary of care document is transmitted electronically by the EP, eligible hospital or CAH to the third party organization…read the full FAQ.

FAQ 12821
Question: If multiple eligible professionals or eligible hospitals contribute information to a shared portal or to a patient’s online personal health record (PHR), how is it counted for meaningful use when the patient accesses the information on the portal or PHR?

This answer is relevant to the following meaningful use objectives: Patient Specific Education and Patient Electronic Access measure 2.

Answer: If an eligible professional sees a patient during the EHR reporting period, the eligible professional may count the patient in the numerator for this measure if the patient (or an authorized representative) views online, downloads, or transmits to a third party any of the health information from the shared portal or online PHR. The same would apply for an eligible hospital or CAH if a patient is discharged during the EHR reporting period. If patient-specific education resources are provided electronically, it may be counted in the numerator for any provider within the group sharing the CEHRT who has contributed information to the patient’s record if that provider has the patient in their denominator for the EHR reporting period. The respective eligible professional, eligible hospital, or CAH must have contributed at least some of the information identified in the Medicare and Medicaid Programs; Electronic Health Record Incentive Program – Stage 3 and Modifications to Meaningful Use in 2015 Through 2017 final rule (80 FR 62807 through 62809) to the shared portal or online PHR for the patient. However, the respective provider need not have contributed the particular information that was viewed, downloaded, or transmitted by the patient. …Read the full FAQ.

FAQ 12825
Question: In calculating the meaningful use objectives requiring patient action, if a patient sends a message or accesses his/her health information made available by their eligible professional (EP), can the other EPs in the practice get credit for the patient’s action in meeting the objectives?

Answer: Yes. This transitive effect applies to the Secure Electronic Messaging objective, the 2nd measure of the Patient Electronic Access (View, Download and Transmit) objective, and the Patient Specific Education objective.

If a patient sends a secure message about a clinical or health related subject to the group practice of their EP, that patient can be counted in the numerator of the Secure Electronic Messaging measure for any of the EPs at the group practice who use the same certified electronic health records technology (CEHRT) that saw and patient during their EHR reporting period.

Similarly, if a patient views, downloads or transmits to a third party the health information that was made available online by their EP, that patient can be counted in the numerator of the 2nd Patient Electronic Access measure for any of the EPs in that group practice who use the same CEHRT and saw that patient during their EHR reporting period.

If patient-specific education resources are provided electronically, it may be counted in the numerator for any provider within the group sharing the CEHRT who has contributed information to the patient’s record if that provider has the patient in their denominator for the EHR reporting period. … Read the full FAQ.

For more information on accurately calculating the numerator for measures, please visit FAQ 8231.

November 10, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

CMS ICD-10 Stats and Metrics

On October 1, 2015 health systems across the country transitioned to the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision – ICD-10. This change will enable providers to capture more details about the health status of their patients to improve patient care and public health surveillance.

CMS has been carefully monitoring the transition and is pleased to report that claims are processing normally. Generally speaking, Medicare claims take several days to be processed and, once processed, Medicare must– by law – wait two weeks before issuing a payment Medicaid claims can take up to 30 days to be submitted and processed by states. For this reason, we will have more information on ICD-10 transition in November.  .

With this in mind, CMS is continuing its vigilant monitoring process of the ICD-10 transition and can share the following metrics detailing Medicare Fee-for-Service claims from 10/1-10/27.

Metrics

October 1-27

Historical Baseline*

Total Claims Submitted

4.6 million per day

4.6 Million per day

Total Claims Rejected due to  incomplete or invalid information

2.0% of total claims submitted

2.0% of total claims submitted

Total Claims Rejected due to invalid ICD-10 codes

0.09% of total claims submitted

0.17% of total claims submitted
(estimated based on end-to-end testing)

Total  Claims Rejected due to invalid ICD-9 codes

0.11% of total claims submitted

0.17% of total claims submitted
(estimated based on end-to-end testing)

Total Claims Denied

10.1% of total claims processed

10% of total claims processed

NOTE: Metrics for total ICD-9 and ICD-10 claims rejections were estimated based on end-to-end testing conducted in 2015 since CMS has not historically collected this data. Other metrics are based on historical claims submissions.

It’s important to know help remains available if you experience issues with ICD-10:

October 29, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

Learn about New Requirements for Participation in EHR Incentive Programs

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) recently announced the release of final rules for the Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Programs and the 2015 Edition Health IT Certification Criteria. The rules will be published on October 16, 2015, and are currently on display in the Federal Register.

The EHR Incentive Programs final rule provides new criteria that eligible professionals, eligible hospitals, and critical access hospitals (CAHs) must meet in order to successfully participate in the EHR Incentive Programs. The final rule outlines program requirements in 2015 through 2017 (Modified Stage 2) and Stage 3 in 2018 and beyond, and includes a comment period for Stage 3.

The 2015 Edition Health IT Certification Criteria final rule builds on past editions of adopted health IT certification criteria, and includes new and updated IT functionality and provisions that support the EHR Incentive Programs’ care improvement, cost reduction, and patient safety across the health system.

EHR Incentive Programs Final Rule Provisions
Through the new requirements of the EHR Incentive Programs, CMS will expand meaningful use of certified EHR technology to promote health information exchange and improved outcomes. The rule also includes changes to the structure of the EHR Incentive Programs to improve efficiency, effectiveness, and flexibility.

Major policy provisions include:

  • Program modifications to reduce reporting burden, eliminate redundant and duplicative reporting, and to better align the objectives and measures of meaningful use with the Stage 3 requirements.
  • A revised single set of objectives and measures, including a reduction of the overall number of objectives to which a provider must attest.
  • Changes in EHR reporting periods, including a shift to calendar year for all providers and 90-day reporting for 2015.
  • Revisions to attestation and payment adjustment deadlines.
  • Optional Stage 3 reporting in 2017.

For more information about the EHR Incentive Programs final rule, view the Final Rule Fact Sheet that highlights key changes to the EHR Incentive Programs.

To learn more about the ONC 2015 Edition Health IT Certification Criteria final rule, visit: https://www.cms.gov/Newsroom/MediaReleaseDatabase/Fact-sheets/2015-Fact-sheets-items/2015-10-06.html

October 7, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

Updated FAQs on Participation in EHR Incentive Programs

To keep you informed of the latest information on the Medicare and Medicaid EHR Incentive Programs, CMS has recently updated three FAQs providing clarification on how to attest to certain objectives and measures.

(FAQ 9690) Question: When reporting on the Summary of Care objective in the EHR Incentive Program, which transitions would count toward the numerator of the measures?

Answer: A transition of care is defined as the movement of a patient from one setting of care (hospital, ambulatory, primary care practice, ambulatory specialty care practice, long-term care, home health, rehabilitation facility) to another. To count toward the Summary of Care objective for providers sharing access to an EHR, the transition or referral may take place between providers with different billing identities such as a different National Provider Identifier (NPI) or hospital CMS Certification Number (CCN) … Read the full FAQ

(FAQ 11984) Question: If an eligible professional (EP) in the EHR Incentive Programs is part of a group practice that has achieved ongoing submission to a public health agency (PHA), but the EP himself/herself did not administer any immunizations to any of the populations for which data is collected by their jurisdiction’s immunization registry during their EHR reporting period, can he/she attest to meeting the measure since they are part of the group practice that is submitting data to the registry?

Answer: If a provider does not administer immunizations, they should not attest to the measure; they must claim the exclusion. If a provider does administer immunizations, but did not have any for a particular EHR reporting period, they are not required to claim the exclusion as long as they have done any necessary registration and testing and are reporting when they do have the data to report.

(FAQ 8231) Question: While the denominator for measures used to calculate meaningful use in the EHR Incentive Programs is restricted to patients seen during the EHR reporting period, is the numerator also restricted to activity during the EHR reporting period or can actions for certain meaningful use measures be counted in the numerator if they took place after the EHR reporting period has ended?

Answer: The criteria for a numerator is not constrained to the EHR reporting period unless expressly stated in the numerator statement for a given meaningful use measure. The numerator for the following meaningful use measures should include only actions that take place within the EHR reporting period: Preventive Care (Patient Reminders) and Secure Electronic Messaging.

For all other meaningful use measures, the actions may reasonably fall outside the EHR reporting period timeframe but must take place no earlier than the start of the reporting year and no later than the date of attestation in order for the patients to be counted in the numerator, unless a longer look-back period is specifically indicated for the objective or measure. This FAQ relates to prior program years and has been archived as of April 10, 2015.

October 1, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

Transcription vs IBM Watson Figuring Out Song Lyrics Infographic

I was recently sent this fascinating infographic that pitted IBM’s Watson against transcriptionists trying to transcribe song lyrics. It’s pretty fun to see the results and how they compare. However, I’m not sure it’s really fair to call it IBM Watson. It looks like they used the voice recognition software in Watson to do the voice to text. If they were really using Watson, then they would have done the voice to text and then compared it against all the song lyrics ever written and then produced the exact song lyrics. However, they said that the transcriptionists weren’t allowed to Google the lyrics. I assume the same was true for Watson.

It’s also worth mentioning that song lyrics can be much harder for a computer to hear than just a straight transcription. I also bet my friends at Nuance would argue that their voice recognition would have performed much better. Plus, I wonder how long the transcriptionists took on these songs. A double or triple checked transcription would be very accurate.

All of this said, this infographic and the results of their experiment (specifically stated as non-scientific) illustrates what most of us that have used the technology already know. Transcriptionists are more accurate than voice recognition. The question most people in healthcare make is whether the costs of a transcriptionist is worth that increase in accuracy. That’s the challenge.

Ok, without further ado, here’s the infographic:
Transcription Services versus IBM Watson and Song Mondegreens

September 29, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.