RAP - The Main Game, page-518

I should have clarified.

The fact is people will still need a Chest Xray. It would not be enough to see a GP in ED, use ResAPP and diagnose them/prescribe medicine based off that. That would NOT be adequate/standard of care.

People will still need CXR, even if ResAPP diagnosed an infection. Even if ResAPP had a 100% accuracy (which btw not test in the world does), patients, when it is physically possible, needs CXR. Because as I've stated above:
"It's because when Drs diagnose chest infections there are other things we need to to order to effectively treat a lung infection. Information that ResAPP will not give us.

Things such as: 1) Location of the infection, 2) Type of infection. I'm talking things like this:
http://www.radiologyassistant.nl/data/bin/a51a0976c3619b_TAB-density-new.jpg
3) SEVERITY of infection. And VERY VERY IMPORTANTLY, any underlying lung conditions such as lung cancer. It would be a terrible terrible tragedy if any cancer was missed, ResAPP cannot diagnose these. When we can, we should still continue to use Xrays, because Xrays can tell and give us a lot of important extra information that ResAPP can't.

Remember it isn't enough to just diagnose a lung infection. We also need to treat the infection EFFECTIVELY and any underlying problems too."

The problem in the first few years of ResAPP, is trying to convince hospitals that they should, on the basis of opportunity cost, give budget allocation to ResAPP to diagnose something when you will still be needed a CXR which can diagnose AND give you more info. In a few years, sure, the price will come down to the point where public institutions will be happy to purchase the license.

I am a junior Dr. I don't think any radiologist would have any concerns with ResAPP, Chest Xrays are not money makers. The big money is in CT/CAT scans, MRIs, and PET scans anyway.