I believe it's called eye-balling. You'll be suprised how good farmers are at this. It's also why I think tech in agriculture is something of an over-sell; farm managers are already some of the most efficient people you'll meet and even a notebook is sometimes too much to ask for them.
Edit: To answer your question with more elaboration: A statistical model is a proxy for not having full knowledge of the subject matter. But any deep analysis of the subject matter will require personal attention. Farmers (to quote my example again) are specifically good because of their personal knowledge of the farm and the sheer amount of time spent working.
There’s a big difference between writing a loan and missing a stroke.
From a medical point of view, you can assume a 10-20% probability of a negative outcome. If you layer on other factors or behaviors in the persons life, the probability of a bad outcome approaches 90%.
Problem is, you need deeply intrusive data at scale. What are the consequences of a organization with Google/Facebook capability who also is your AI doctor? It’s easy to foresee complications.
For example, we may know that evaluating loan applicants is best done with in-person interviews, but it’s simply too costly and delays getting loans to people too long, so we agree to use an automated decision process knowing the cost of it making some mistakes will be part of what is paid for the benefit of being able to process many applications quickly.