@inproceedings{kell-etal-2021-take,
    title = "What Would it Take to get Biomedical {QA} Systems into Practice?",
    author = "Kell, Gregory  and
      Marshall, Iain  and
      Wallace, Byron  and
      Jaun, Andre",
    editor = "Fisch, Adam  and
      Talmor, Alon  and
      Chen, Danqi  and
      Choi, Eunsol  and
      Seo, Minjoon  and
      Lewis, Patrick  and
      Jia, Robin  and
      Min, Sewon",
    booktitle = "Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Machine Reading for Question Answering",
    month = nov,
    year = "2021",
    address = "Punta Cana, Dominican Republic",
    publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
    url = "https://preview.aclanthology.org/fix-sig-urls/2021.mrqa-1.3/",
    doi = "10.18653/v1/2021.mrqa-1.3",
    pages = "28--41",
    abstract = "Medical question answering (QA) systems have the potential to answer clinicians' uncertainties about treatment and diagnosis on-demand, informed by the latest evidence. However, despite the significant progress in general QA made by the NLP community, medical QA systems are still not widely used in clinical environments. One likely reason for this is that clinicians may not readily trust QA system outputs, in part because transparency, trustworthiness, and provenance have not been key considerations in the design of such models. In this paper we discuss a set of criteria that, if met, we argue would likely increase the utility of biomedical QA systems, which may in turn lead to adoption of such systems in practice. We assess existing models, tasks, and datasets with respect to these criteria, highlighting shortcomings of previously proposed approaches and pointing toward what might be more usable QA systems."
}