Not quite the same. In the doctor's case, it's expected that there is trouble shooting to be going on. Especially if one is going there due to an issue at the same time. By the time it gets to some form of production (unless we are talking about the earlier stages, conceptual, early prototyping stages etc), especially if one hasn't been there thru the other stages, a certain level of finality would be more expected. Especially if it's labeled in some for as "good to go".
If it's labeled as "print ready" or "good to go" or whatever, I would say that there is room to scratch and burp as to who is responsible. Having said that, if I happen to spot something that's iffy, regardless of what it is and regardless of it's status as "good to go" or not, I would bring it to their attention, but I wouldn't do anything on my own. That's just asking for there to be trouble in other forms later on. Case in point, with Gino fixing the errors and being questioned on why charging for them.
I have seen it though, when I have gotten "finished" artwork (even if it's flawless vector, a dream file to use) that has production "concerns", the customers also tend to have been told by their "designers" that not to listen to the other people, it should be done as is (even though the "designers" have no experience in that specific form of production, some I doubt have any experience with physical production). Those customers aren't expecting a "doctor" to look over things, but to handle it handle it. Now, I will still tell them (in which case they think I'm flimflaming them) the issues, do that want it "as is" or change. It's about 50/50 on which way they go. And it's easier for me to make changes compared to what some of y'all may have to go through with your production workflows.