Rather than looking at the criticisms in these documents as a sign of major trouble, Memorial Sloan Kettering spokesperson Caitlin Hool told STAT, that they are evidence of “the robust nature of the process” of development.

She underscored to the news site that “while Watson for Oncology provides safe treatment options, treatment decisions ultimately require the involvement and clinical judgement of the treating physician,” stressing that “no technology can replace a doctor and his or her knowledge about their individual patient.”


A STAT report on Watson for Oncology from September, 2017, found that “the supercomputer isn’t living up to the lofty expectations IBM created for it.”

It noted at the time that rather than Watson figuring out how to treat cancer automatically from its access to data, a “couple of dozen physicians at a single, though highly respected, U.S. hospital, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York” are inputting their own advice into the system to help to guide its decision-making.

The report also noted that IBM “in its rush to bolster flagging revenue, unleashed a product without fully assessing the challenges of deploying it in hospitals globally. While it has emphatically marketed Watson for cancer care, IBM hasn’t published any scientific papers demonstrating how the technology affects physicians and patients.”

Back to HCB News

Business Affairs Homepage