Cautious
The dataset was split for training and testing purposes; 66 CT scans from 44 patients
I am not a statistician, but that sounds like a small sample.
The thing that worries the hell out of me is that cost-cutting politicians/administrators/whoever start treating the machine as an infallible source of diagnoses. Healthy people are people who actually need treatment will suffer. And unlike a human, you can't go to a big box of ML and say "what were you thinking?" because it wasn't thinking.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
