Using image-analysis "AI" to diagnose cancer or whatever sounds good until you realise they'll use it as an excuse to fire healthcare professionals and defund hospitals.
They're trying to save money, not lives.
Even in the best case scenario (Human-in-the-loop, where they have a human check the AI's results) what will happen is that the senior oncologist reviewing your tests will be replaced by an underpaid, overworked medical intern in an underdeveloped country.
But even if you believe the capitalists won't take this chance to offshore medical care (lol.), even if you think that an expert will still be reviewing your results...
Studies show humans get less accurate when they know results have been pre-checked by an AI.
The only way AI could lead to better outcomes would be if it was used alongside existing systems: in other words, if those in charge of funding healthcare were willing to pay for an expensive doctor AND an expensive AI checker.
And if you believe that's what they'll do, I have a bridge to sell you.
Are there legal requirements on how a patient is cared for? Could there be a requirement that, where available, AI was used to aid in diagnosis? Did people resist x-rays, or whatever, because the old ways were somehow better? Do doctors rely on any existing tech? Does that make them less effective?
