MedWorm: Marketing Consultants

Shire warning letter is about content, not context

HealthCareVox — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 17:56:40 +0100

Over the past few days, much digital ink has been spilled over the warning letter Shire recently received for a promotional video that was uploaded to YouTube. According to Pharmaceutical Executive and other sources, FDA told Shire that the company had overstated a series of claims made by celebrity spokesperson Ty Pennington in a company video. I have received a number of questions about this event over the past few days. My response has been this: the FDA warning letter focused on the content of the advertisement rather than the context. While it is certainly interesting that FDA asked Shire to withdraw a YouTube video, the medium is less important to the agency than the message. Shire was warned because it produced materials that did not contain adequate fair balance information, not because the video appeared on a video sharing Website. In a white paper published by my firm Envision Solutions, Cymfony and Seyfarth Shaw last year we made a similar argument. We said: “Although the FDA has not released firm guidance on pharmaceutical Internet communications, we have many years of received precedent to guide us . . . At minimum, drug firms thinking about communicating via social media should design their programs to be consistent with . . . principles [such as fair balance, avoiding the dissemination of off-label information and reporting adverse events] and be ready to discuss their efforts with the FDA.” The recent FDA action supports our recommendation. Overall, the warning letter has not made Shire gun-shy about alternative interactive media. Company executive Matt Cabrey told Pharmaceutical Executive that Shire will continue to utilize these technologies to promote its products. (Source: HealthCareVox)

MedWorm Sponsored Message: Find out how you can get your message across here by sponsoring this MedWorm news feed.

With capitalism under siege, the anti-single payer crowd needs new rhetoric

Envisioning 2.0 — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 16:23:25 +0100

For the past seven days, much of the world has been riveted by the unfolding economic crisis and the efforts of government institutions to staunch the bleeding.Â The New York Times reported yesterday that the United States and Britain are currently working on a joint response to the crisis.Â The upshot: the countries are considering partly nationalizing banks in order to (hopefully) stabilize them. Ever since the great debate over the $700 billion rescue plan passed by Congress recently, we have witnessed the socialization of free market economies across the world.Â Citizens are watching in fear and apprehension as their governments attempt to save their bank deposits and retirement accounts.Â Although many are conflicted by these activities, most agree that something must be done.Â Interestingly, for conservatives in the US, government has suddenly become a force for good rather than a source of evil. Given this, I thought that an e-mail I recently received from the Cato Institute about Barack Obamaâ€™s health plan seemed especially jarring.Â The think tank will soon publish a new Briefing Paper, â€œDoes Barack Obama Support Socialized Medicine?â€ Cato’s Michael Cannon answers that question with a resounding â€œyes.â€ For many years, opponents of massive government intervention in the US health system have used the term â€œsocialized medicineâ€ to convince people that this strategy is a bad idea.Â However, many people also believed that our financial institutions needed fewer regulations rather than more.Â Now, it is abundantly clear that this philosophy has led to many unintended consequences.Â Now people are calling for increased government intervention and more stringent regulation. Now, what does this mean for healthcare?Â Currently, the economic crisis is causing increasing numbers of Americans to forgo much-needed medical care.Â In addition, with unemployment steadily increasing, many more people are going to be without health insurance. Given these trends, the term â€œsocialized medicineâ€ becomes a lot less scary. People â€“ especially those with young children â€“ will want access to health care, even if it is subsidized and more heavily regulated by the government. As a communicator, I make it my business to understand when a message is either ineffective or beginning to ring false.Â Arguing against single-payer health care because it will be akin to socialized medicine no longer works in the current environment.Â Free marketers need to come up with some new rhetoric. (Source: Envisioning 2.0)

Help pew tweak its next internet survey

HealthCareVox — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:26:34 +0100

This fall the Pew Internet & American Life project will be conducting a new national survey looking at the influence of the Internet on health. Pew’s Internet use survey is incredibly influential and is the study many people cite first when talking about this topic. Now, Pew’s Susannah Fox is asking for a little bit of help with the new study. Fox writes: “One of the first tasks is to look at our tried and true 'trend' questions and decide which ones we should repeat as is and which ones need to be updated. Since I benefit so much from reader comments on this blog, I'd like to crowd-source some questions for this survey.The first question I would like to consider is the ‘screener’ question which yields our estimate that 80% of internet users go online for health information.”Now’s your chance to influence this important study by providing your comments on this question. Click here to learn more. (Source: HealthCareVox)

If you’re conducting telephone surveys you must include cell-only population

HealthCareVox — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 16:30:58 +0100

Over the past few years, statisticians and their fellow travelers have been nervously tracking the growth of the cellphone-only population to determine whether omitting this group will significantly skew the results of the polls they produce. Now, data from the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press indicates that it is no longer a smart idea to fail to include cell-only users in telephone survey samples. A few days ago, Pew published a study looking at how the growing cell-only population is influencing polling for the presidential race. Pew concludes that while including cell phone users in the survey sample does not sway the aggregate results overly much, it reveals that cell-only users are much more likely to be young and support Senator Barack Obama. Pew reports that: “In the pooled data, cell-only young people are considerably less likely than young people reached by landline to identify with or lean to the Republican Party, and even less likely to say they support John McCain. . . Among the cell-only respondents under age 30, there is a 34-point gap - 62% are Democrats, 28% Republican.”*Pew concludes that: “Even though the omission of cell phones from election polls does not currently make a large difference in the substantive results, Pew's surveys this year suggest at least the possibility of a small bias in landline surveys.”What does this mean for those conducting telephone-based market research? Well, when studying small shifts in behavior and attitudes where skews on either side can determine whether or not the results are statistically significant, it’s best to be doubly sure that you include cellphone-only users in your sample. All of this is fascinating stuff. To learn more about US government surveys tracking the growth of the cell-phone only population, please click here. *If you are of the mind that young people don’t (and won’t vote), see this nugget from Pew’s research: “While 18-29-year-olds reached by cell phone tend to have less experience voting than their landline counterparts, they are just as interested in the 2008 campaign, and express just as much intention to vote this year.” (Source: HealthCareVox)

Diving into health 2.0

Envisioning 2.0 — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 17:33:36 +0100

I’ve been quite busy recently over at HealthCareVox parsing the ongoing debate about the Health 2.0 movement. I normally try to minimize cross posting between this blog and HealthCareVox, but I thought readers of Envisioning 2.0 might be interested in the debate and my take on it. You can view my thoughts by clicking here and here. (Source: Envisioning 2.0)

More on health 2.0: are consumers central or secondary?

HealthCareVox — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 17:10:34 +0100

Late last week, I posted an analysis of the potential and pitfalls of the current Health 2.0 movement. It was developed in response to a public argument currently taking place between Dmitriy Kruglyak and Matthew Holt about whether Health 2.0 is supported by the fundamentals. In my post, I outlined a framework I believe will be useful for those attempting to determine whether Health 2.0 companies will be successful in the long term. I was honored to see that other observers took a hard look at my analysis and provided their own perspective on the issues I raised. Most significantly, Vijay Goel, MD “classifies the [market] opportunities differently” than I do, expanding on my focus on consumer/provider decisions, information flow, finance and therapeutic advances. Goel also disagrees a bit with my take that Health 2.0 companies will have to prove their mettle to existing health industry players. Instead, he suggests that we need to focus more on the impact consumers are having on the fundamentals of the health system and build new metrics to evaluate whether businesses are harnessing consumer energy appropriately. Goel wasn’t the only observer to suggest that I have not focused enough attention on the impact of the Internet and technology empowered consumer on the health system. Janet Johnson left a comment on this blog noting that industry players need to understand the role consumers are playing, especially in the area of health content creation and exchange. I have often talked about the impact of consumers on the evolving health system on this blog and elsewhere. Indeed consumers (defined as medical professionals, patients, caregivers and others) have a central role to play in the Health 2.0 movement. However, I am also careful not to overestimate their impact. There are some areas where Internet-empowered consumers are going to be central and other areas where they will play a strong (or weak) secondary role. (Source: HealthCareVox)

MedWorm Sponsored Message: Find out how you can get your message across here by sponsoring this MedWorm news feed.

Health 2.0: fad or fundamental?

HealthCareVox — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 22:33:24 +0100

Late last week, the Washington Post announced that Steve Case’s Revolution Health Network initiated discussions to merge with EveryDay Health. According to the Post, “the new company would be one of the world’s most visited online health information networks.” The announcement has generated interesting reactions from a range of observers, including Dmitriy Kruglyak and Matthew Holt. Earlier this week, Kruglyak and Holt got into a bit of a public spat. At the heart of their disagreement is whether Revolution Health’s downfall indicates that the “Health 2.0* movement” has major fundamental problems. Kruglak argues that “Health 2.0 represents irrational exuberance around unproven healthcare ideas that do not have a sustainable business model. The intended use of the term is to confuse and distract the listener from questioning the validity of the concept. The term should not be used for proven projects to avoid the negative association.” He urged his readers to “ditch the hype and focus on proving their claims with metrics.” Holt quickly fired back, calling Kruglyak’s analysis “weak” and uninformed. Rather than focusing Health 2.0 on the numerous companies that are trying to leverage a range of new technologies for profit and power, he believes it is about: “Participatory change in how consumers/patients/citizens relate to each other, and to the health care system using new technologies.” He rejects the argument that his upcoming Health 2.0 conference is about “hyping the creation of a standalone industry in which every new venture would be successful.” (Source: HealthCareVox)

Participate in an innovative web dialogue about interactive media & health

HealthCareVox — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:17:23 +0100

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is hosting an innovative Web Dialogue about the use of various interactive technologies for health communication and public health. I’m honored that CDC has asked me to serve as a panelist for this event, which will occur today. CDC describes the event as an online “discussion focusing on Social Networks, Blogs, and other Web 2.0 applications and their uses in health marketing and public health. Participants will share examples of how they have used these applications and hear from others about ways of using these new channels of communication. The dialogue will open at 9:00 a.m. and remain open until 7:00 p.m. (EDT).” A few good friends, including Nedra Weinreich and R. Craig Lefebvre will also serve as virtual panelists for the event. To learn more and to register to participate, please click here. (Source: HealthCareVox)

Participate in an innovative web dialogue about interactive media & health

Envisioning 2.0 — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 18:24:42 +0100

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is hosting an innovative Web Dialogue about the use of various interactive technologies for health communication and public health. I’m honored that CDC has asked me to serve as a panelist for this event, scheduled for September 16, 2008. CDC describes the event as an online “discussion focusing on Social Networks, Blogs, and other Web 2.0 applications and their uses in health marketing and public health. Participants will share examples of how they have used these applications and hear from others about ways of using these new channels of communication. The dialogue will open at 9:00 a.m. and remain open until 7:00 p.m. (EDT).” A few good friends, including Nedra Weinreich and R. Craig Lefebvre will also serve as virtual panelists for the event. To learn more and to register to participate, please click here. (Source: Envisioning 2.0)

On remembering & coming together

HealthCareVox — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 16:02:19 +0100

On September 11, 2001, I watched the Twin Towers come down from an office near Ground Zero. On September 12 and 13, I mourned with my fellow New Yorkers. On September 14, I and many of my fellows got up, and tried to resume our lives, determined to not let fear prevent us from achieving our dreams. Now, as I remember that fateful day, I think about the blessings and gifts I have received along the way. I also contemplate the wonderful online and offline communities that have sprung into being – especially in the health arena. I marvel at the bonds people have formed, the knowledge they have shared and the willingness to help other people – often with little or no expectation of reward. I also am honored that the people I have met and worked with online and off have helped me achieve some of the dreams I have held for a long time. To these individuals, I say thank you. Today, our presidential candidates Senators Barack Obama and John McCain are in New York to help call Americans to service. They are asking us to unite in a common cause to tackle our many challenges and give back to our community and country. I think many of the people I’ve met over the years – whether they are in government, business, technology, non-profits – or other organizations embody this sprit. On this day, as we remember the past, let us continue to strive together toward a brighter future. (Source: HealthCareVox)

Briefly noted: are urls going away?

HealthCareVox — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 22:21:20 +0100

I’ve been following Forrester Research’s Jeremiah Owyang recently and find his blog posts to be insightful and on-point. Recently he asked whether URLs will become less important over time. He wondered this because Google’s Chrome browser highlights relevant search results as well as URLs.After thinking about this, I’ve noticed that I’ve seen this happening in real time. We use Google Analytics to track traffic to my firm's Website (Envision Solutions). This free service lets us understand what is driving people to the firm’s online content and what publicaions are most popular. I’ve attached two screen shots illustrating data from Google Analytics between July and September 2008 to illustrate what we've observed. First, (see below), nearly 30% of the firm’s Internet traffic comes from either Google or Yahoo, indicating that when people want to find Envision Solutions, they are just as likely to conduct a search as type the firm’s Web address into a browser. (Much thanks to The Health Care Blog and DiabetesMine for sending people to the site.) Second, take a look at the top keywords people are using to find the company. You’ll notice that many use the firm's name or mine, as I run the firm. This illustrates that as Owyang notes, if people are curious about a company or product they are often likely to conduct a search to find its Website. I don’t think URLs are going to disappear – especially for linking content online. But, they are clearly becoming less important for people seeking information. (Source: HealthCareVox)

MedWorm Sponsored Message: Find out how you can get your message across here by sponsoring this MedWorm news feed.

Gov. sarah palin discussed in latest health wonk review

Envisioning 2.0 — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 15:12:00 +0100

The latest edition of the Health Wonk Review is up. It has some interesting takes on a number of current health policy-related issues. However, what I found most interesting was bloggers’ analysis of Gov. Sarah Palin’s record on health care. Interesting reading for anyone seeking to get smart on Sen. John McCain’s VP pick. (Source: Envisioning 2.0)

The state of the health blogosphere

HealthCareVox — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 16:23:40 +0100

Today my firm Envision Solutions released a new report that provides the most detailed picture to date of the state of health blogosphere. The folks at The Health Care Blog were kind enough to publish a guest post I wrote about the publication. Please click here to view it and learn more about the evolving health blogosphere. (Source: HealthCareVox)

The state of the health blogosphere

Envisioning 2.0 — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 15:30:23 +0100

Unbranded advertising : it’s not about downplaying side effects

Envisioning 2.0 — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 16:39:10 +0100

Today, the Wall Street Journal has an article focusing on how unbranded advertising (or commercials that don’t mention a specific product) is gaining traction. The Journal writes: “Unbranded . . . advertising is gaining popularity among drugmakers, which in recent months have come under renewed fire from lawmakers for the ways in which they promote drugs directly to consumers.” The Journal also suggests that companies are using this type of advertising in order to avoid talking about the side effects associated with their medications. The Journal’s focus on unbranded marketing is certainly interesting, but this strategy has always been popular — at least with some drug firms. Pharmaceutical companies (especially in non-US markets) regularly use this type of advertising to educate and raise awareness about issues related to a product. In addition, I doubt Pfizer has aired these advertisements to avoid talking about drug side effects. It just makes good marketing sense. In a market where your product stands virtually unchallenged (Chantix is only one of two drugs approved by the FDA for anti-smoking uses – the other, Zyban, has lost patent protection), it makes a lot of sense to run unbranded advertising First, there is less likelihood that you are building a market for a competitor. Second, by pushing people to an unbranded Website, you get that much closer to driving them to a online property focusing on the drug. (Source: Envisioning 2.0)

Post from the past: depression education, cause alliances & social media communications

HealthCareVox — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 16:09:50 +0100

In the second edition of my "Posts from the Past" series, I'd like to highlight a group of articles I wrote in 2007 about pharma-non-profit cause alliances and social media. Given that my blogging time is getting ever-shorter, I'm not sure when I'll publish another series like this, but revisiting them is always lots of fun for me. To read the series, please click here. (Source: HealthCareVox)

MedWorm Sponsored Message: Find out how you can get your message across here by sponsoring this MedWorm news feed.

On healthy people 2020: improving trust & health literacy should be priority

HealthCareVox — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:54:31 +0100

Although it is not widely known, the US government is responsible for meeting specific public health goals over a ten-year period. Because of an initiative called Healthy People, government agencies like Health and Human Services have committed to, among other things, eliminating health disparities between people of different racial and economic backgrounds by the year 2010. Advocacy organizations, public officials and others take an avid interest in the development of new Healthy People ten-year objectives. The process is about to start again as government formulates goals it must achieve by 2020. The Internet has greatly expanded the government’s ability to reach out to a broad group of stakeholders for input on the Healthy People 2020 objectives. R. Craig Lefebvre, a noted social marketing expert and adjunct professor of Prevention and Community Health at George Washington University’s School of Public Health, is helping to lead an effort to gather input and analysis from the health blogosphere and other sources. He has launched a series on his blog featuring posts from a range of experts about “how health communications, social marketing and health information technologies can contribute to our public health goals for the year 2020.” (Source: HealthCareVox)

The health wonk review is up

Envisioning 2.0 — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:43:14 +0100

The latest edition of the Health Wonk Review is up at Workers Comp Insider. Be sure to read the interesting posts about the return of Harry and Louise. This time, they are for comprehensive health reform. (Source: Envisioning 2.0)

Mass plan reduces number of residents without health insurance

Envisioning 2.0 — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:29:26 +0100

Over recent months, the Massachusetts universal health insurance plan has received some knocks because people were hesitant to enroll in the program and its ever-increasing costs. Now, a new government analysis provides us with a better sense of how the plan is doing. Massachusetts reports that “since the implementation of health care reform, enrollment in private insurance has grown by more than 191,000.” In addition: o Massachusetts employers have not dropped health insurance o Outlays for emergency room visits decreased by 37%, saving the state $68 million o The percentage of patients seeking certain types of preventive care has increased You can view the government report by clicking here. (Source: Envisioning 2.0)

Research: most online communities tank

HealthCareVox — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 16:32:28 +0100

This summer, lots of new research is being published focusing on the real-world impact of social technologies. While going through my Twitter inbox I came across a post on one of the Wall Street Journal’s blogs citing a Deloitte study indicating that most online communities are “virtual ghost towns.” According to the Journal: “Businesses launching online communities repeat a series of blunders. First, they have a tendency to get seduced by bells and whistles and blow their online-community budget on technology. Moran suggests that businesses spend resources identifying and reaching out to potential community members instead of investing in software that makes predictions, or even social-networking technology.”Deloitte also notes that another major reason most online communities fail is that many of them are not staffed appropriately. Discuss This Study On Envision Solutions' Facebook Page This research provides interesting food for thought. I’d love to hear what you think about it. I recently launched a Facebook page for my firm Envision Solutions, LLC. The first topic on the page's discussion board is related to this study. To visit the page, please click here. To receive updates about new discussion topics and research from Envision, please consider “becoming a fan” of the group. (Source: HealthCareVox)

The kaiser family foundation health blogosphere event: close but no cigar

Envisioning 2.0 — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 16:34:53 +0100

A few weeks ago, the Kaiser Family Foundation hosted a forum where a panel of bloggers and experts discussed the “growing influence of blogs on health news and policy debates.” I took the time to listen to the event’s podcast on my way home from work one day and found it to be interesting and somewhat informative. However, in many respects I was disappointed by the session. I list the primary reasons for my disappointment below. 1. Lack Of Data: I think attendees of the event would have been well-served by an overview of the current state of the health blogosphere. Specifically, data points from Pew on the number of Americans writing health blogs and case studies focusing on instances where they have influenced mainstream media coverage (there are many) would have been very helpful. Several members of the audience had questions along these lines, which (unfortunately) went unanswered. 2. Lack Of Diversity: The panel was staffed by members of the media, high-level political aides and representatives of think tanks. I was happy to see John McDonough on the panel, as he was interviewed for a report my firm developed back in 2006 on the health blogosphere. However, there are many other individuals that have had a significant influence on the development of the health policy blogosphere. One of them is Joe Paduda who launched the Health Wonk Review. It would have been nice to see people like this included on the panel. 3. Lack of Strategy: I found Secretary Michael Leavitt’s talk on why he decided to start a blog fascinating. However, I kept wondering when he was going to focus more on the strategic thinking behind HHS’s various forays into the blogosphere. For example, he started blogging during the HHS’s pandemic flu initiative. What was the impact on that effort on communications with the Department’s stakeholders? How did the feedback provided on the HHS blog influence policy? In addition, the Secretary is using his blog to bypass traditional media sources in order to ensure the Department’s perspective reaches its key stakeholders. How effective has that effort been? Has his blog influenced reporting on HHS in the blogosphere and mainstream media? These are just a few of the questions I was left with after the Kaiser event. I’m sure that Kaiser will continue to focus on health blogging in the future. While this session was a decent introduction, I’m hoping that in future years they dig a lot deeper. (Source: Envisioning 2.0)

MedWorm Sponsored Message: Find out how you can get your message across here by sponsoring this MedWorm news feed.

Grand rounds: new producers, but still going strong

HealthCareVox — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 15:48:28 +0100

A few weeks ago, Nick Genes, MD, PhD founder of the popular health blog carnival Grand Rounds announced that he would be no longer handling the day-to-day production of the online event. I was sad to hear this, but happy to learn that the project had been picked up by some very capable hands. Colin Son and Dr. Val Jones have agreed to take over Grand Rounds for what will be hopefully another 200+ editions. You can read the latest edition of Grand Rounds here. (Also, thanks to this week's host Daniel Goldberg of the Medical Humanities blog for mentioning a prevous HealthCareVox post about trust of online/offline health information sources.) (Source: HealthCareVox)

Post from the past: audience fragmentation and social media: why healthcare is different

HealthCareVox — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:28:19 +0100

With summer winding down and many on vacation, I thought it would be a nice idea to highlight some posts that continue to receive many visits despite being years old. Sometimes I find it helpful to revisit old posts and ask myself: “Is this still true?” I’ll leave the answer to that question for a future post. In the meantime, until the end of the month, I’ll be highlighting posts from the HealthCareVox archives for your reading pleasure. (It’s hard to believe I’ve written more than 270.)I must admit that this idea came from reading a few other blogs, including PR Squared and Musings of a Distractible Mind. However, as like I like to say, if you see a good idea – copy it. Now, click here for the first post, “Audience Fragmentation & Social Media: Why Healthcare Is Different.” (Source: HealthCareVox)

Esther dyson & cdc talk the web & other topics on the digital health revolution

HealthCareVox — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 15:43:26 +0100

Last year I had the opportunity to speak with Internet guru Esther Dyson for the Digital Health Revolution. We spoke about a range of subjects, including the future of the Internet and the impact of the genetic revolution on how we think about and manage our health. I also invited the very talented Erin Edgerton of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to the show. We spoke about the CDC’s efforts to leverage social technologies for health promotion and education. Click here to view Dyson's interview and here to watch Edgerton's. (Source: HealthCareVox)

Must-read: universal mccann’s global study on social technology use

HealthCareVox — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 16:02:55 +0100

Forrester’s Jeremiah Owyang posted a note recently about Universal Mccann’s global data on social technology usage patterns (i.e., blogging, social networking, etc.). This is a very interesting study that provides some context on how the United States stacks up with the rest of world. As for the study methodology, the company says its "surveys have been scripted and hosted on Universal McCann’s in-house online research system, Intuition. All surveys are self completion and the data collected is entirely quantitative. Every market is representative of the 16-54 Active Internet Universe. In this Wave 17,000 internet users in 29 countries were interviewed. To be included you need to be using the internet everyday or every other day." Click the image below to view the full presentation. Not into Slideshare? Click here to download a PDF of the presentation. Universal Mccann International Social Media Research Wave 3view presentation (tags: socialmedia research social media) (Source: HealthCareVox)

New report examines impact of health web on patient-provider relations, trust of user-generated content

Envisioning 2.0 — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:34:51 +0100

Earlier this week, Harris Interactive released the latest edition of a tracking poll focusing on the number of Americans who go online to find health information. The big surprise this year was that “only” 150 million US adults had reported using the Internet to find health and medical content this year. In 2007, 160 million Americans reported conducting online health research. Harris cautioned readers not to get too excited about the poll, saying: “The difference between this year’s and last year’s survey results . . . are well within the possible sampling error.” Overall, there are still a lot of Americans turning to the Internet for health content. In light of these results, I found a comment by Humphrey Taylor, chairman of the Harris Poll, especially interesting. He said: “[Currently] there are no objective measures of how accurate and reliable . . . online information actually is. [However], it seems that the Internet is positively contributing to the quality of health care.” I found this commentary intriguing because of the results of a national survey my firm Envision Solutions released yesterday. Kelton Research, a well-regarded polling firm, conducted the study. Thirty-eight percent of Americans say they have doubted a medical professional’s advice because it conflicted with information they found online. Alan Brookstone, author of CanadianEMR, said the results confirm “what most doctors are already finding in their practices.” Brookstone suggests the Internet may be having a negative impact on the patient-provider relationship. My belief is that online information is causing Americans to view providers’ advice critically, which in some cases may actually benefit relations between patients and medical professionals. Examining Perceptions Of Patient & Health Provider-Generated Online Content Research published earlier this year by iCrossing tells us that trust of the Internet lags behind its popularity. Given this, we decided to examine Americans’ perceptions of health information published by providers and patients on blogs, online forums and other Websites. We wanted to determine whether it is appropriate for us to assume that content created by patients is viewed as highly trustworthy. We found that Americans are much more likely to trust information developed by medical professionals. Except for the young, most US adults did not list patient-developed content as one of their most trusted health information sources. Overall, this study provides us with helpful information we can use to better understand how Americans view online health content and how it influences medical decision-making. To download a summary of the survey results, please click here. (Source: Envisioning 2.0)

MedWorm Sponsored Message: Find out how you can get your message across here by sponsoring this MedWorm news feed.

New report examines impact of health web on patient-provider relations, trust of user-generated content

HealthCareVox — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:04:14 +0100

Welcoming jim edwards back to the blogosphere

HealthCareVox — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 17:28:15 +0100

It's been a very busy week, but an e-mail from Jim Edwards, formerly of Brandweek, annoucing that he is once again writing about the pharmaceutical industry, caught my eye. Welcome back Jim! It's good to see you again! To read his new blog, please click here. (Source: HealthCareVox)

From the health wonk review: is healthcare a right?

Envisioning 2.0 — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 17:23:06 +0100

Yesterday, David Williams published a very interesting (and easy to read) edition of the Health Wonk Review. One entry caught my eye. The author of a post from the blog Amateur Economists suggests that all Americans have access to health care and that “in countries where universal care is in place, you do not get a ‘choice’ to go to the doctor you think is better than the other.” JC, who wrote the post goes on to note that “Americans love the idea of ‘fairness,’ but when it comes to ourselves and our bodies and our health, we want the best even if it is what others cannot afford.” I have heard this argument many times before. However, as is my custom, I am not going to take a position on JC’s statement. But, I will say this: If we are going to have a debate about the benefits versus drawbacks of non-US health systems, we must take facts rather than rhetoric into account. In a number of countries, including France, many people purchase supplemental health insurance policies that provide services not covered by the public system. In addition, physicians in Japan – partly because their salaries are capped by the government – feverishly compete for patients. With this in mind, it is important to note that some countries are struggling to deal with a new breed of health consumer that is demanding – and sometimes receiving – services not covered by national health insurance plans. A few months ago, I wrote about how this trend is playing out in the United Kingdom. Those interested in learning more about how other countries operate their health systems can start with the resources listed below. -National Public Radio: The network has been running an ongoing series focusing on how European countries run their health systems. While the pieces tend to be very favorable, they do provide a glimpse of the challenges faced by each country and how they are attempting to manage them. -Wall Street Journal: This article focuses on the Dutch health system and why it receives generally high marks. (Source: Envisioning 2.0)

Keller fay group: pharma should stop salivating over social media

HealthCareVox — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 15:55:58 +0100

Earlier this month, the Keller Fay Group, a word-of-mouth marketing company, released research that has gotten a lot of attention amongst some of my colleagues. The study, which was featured in eMarketer’s newsletter recently, indicates that 74% of peer-to-peer pharmaceutical-related conversations happen offline. Less than 10% occurs on the Internet. Ed Keller, CEO of the Keller Fay Group had this to say: “This statistic should be an eye-opener for marketers obsessing over emerging digital media and blogs. For some brands, it’s important to facilitate talk online, but reaching influencers at events or by providing information they can share offline is crucial.” My take on this study is that it makes a lot of sense – especially if you understand how people are consuming health-related content online and who they go to for advice. According to a report issued by iCrossing in January 2008: “34% of health searchers use social media resources to delve into health-related topics, with Wikipedia, . . . online forums and message boards the most important individual tools; as with other areas of interest, social media hold a particular appeal for 18-to-34 year old health searchers, while overall, men appear more likely than women to use online social media to research health and wellness issues.”iCrossing also found that “trust in Internet resources . . . is not yet proportionate to their overall popularity.” All of this research can only lead us to one, common sense conclusion: The Internet is important, but should not be the only focus of a pharma marketing effort. I think most marketers would agree that an integrated marketing campaign that utilizes each channel (social technologies, mainstream media, mobile wom) appropriately for the maximum benefit is the smart way to go. The Keller Fay study is certainly interesting, but no eye opener for those taking a common-sense approach to pharmaceutical marketing. (Source: HealthCareVox)

Kaiser family foundation hosts webinar on health blogosphere

HealthCareVox — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 15:48:08 +0100

The Kaiser Family Foundation is holding a Webinar on July 29 focusing on the growing influence of policy-related health blogs on the news agenda and journalism. I’ve witnessed this trend first-hand – mainly via my other blog Envisioning 2.0 – when I have participated in a number of debates and conversations on a range of health subjects. Sometimes my posts have been featured on major news Websites like Reuters and the Houston Chronicle. Michael Leavitt, secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services will keynote the event. It looks very interesting and I’m planning on making time to attend virtually. For more information about the event, please click here. (Source: HealthCareVox)

MedWorm Sponsored Message: Find out how you can get your message across here by sponsoring this MedWorm news feed.

Medicare ate the us federal budget!

Envisioning 2.0 — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 15:27:20 +0100

Much has been made of the recent showdown between physicians, insurers and Congress over the cuts to physician payments under Medicare. Physicians won this round, but the Medicare monster is growing. If we don’t take serious steps to confront it, Medicare could eventually consume an unacceptable amount of the federal budget. David Williams of the Health Business Blog recently put together an excellent look at the Medicare monster and some radical advice on what to do about it. One of his suggestions has been floated before, but has gotten nowhere: asking Medicare beneficiaries to pay more depending on their income and assets. Click here for Williams’ prescription for taming the Medicare monster. (Source: Envisioning 2.0)

Digital divide closes: two-thirds of african americans online

HealthCareVox — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:14:12 +0100

A brief, but significant blog post today. New data from Yankelovich indicates that the black-white digital divide has narrowed significantly. Better yet, it has closed. According to the study: -68% of African Americans report they are online – compared with 71% of all Americans -90% of black teens use the InternetThere are still some differences in online access among African Americans by region. The study indicates that blacks living in the south are least likely to be online. Only 63% of this group has Internet access. Get more information about this groundbreaking study here. Source: Ignite Health Blog (Source: HealthCareVox)

Mcneil pediatrics “seeds” unbranded adhd online community on facebook

HealthCareVox — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 17:32:56 +0100

Today, yet another Johnson & Johnson affiliated company has begun to use social technologies to communicate about health.* McNeil Pediatrics, a division of Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals, recently launched a group on Facebook, ADHD Moms. McNeil bills ADHD moms as a “unique online destination where mothers of children with ADHD can hear directly from other moms about their experiences raising children with this condition.” What’s most interesting about this effort is that the social component of the initiative is muted – which is unsurprising for a pharmaceutical company. At least initially, it looks like the Facebook page will feature one-way dialogue from caregivers and health experts to the Facebook community. Unlike most Facebook groups, people are not currently able to post videos, commentary and other information on the ADHD Moms Facebook page. Instead, by becoming a “fan” of ADHD moms, Facebook users will be receive updates with news and information about ADHD on a regular basis via the social network. (Source: HealthCareVox)

On doctor-patient communication: apathy, inconvenience stymie electronic correspondence

Envisioning 2.0 — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 15:17:17 +0100

I enjoy reading Dr. Benjamin Brewer’s regular column in the Wall Street Journal. He has a great way of highlighting issues while providing a valuable reality check. In the latest installment of “The Doctor’s Office” Brewer talks about why he is shutting down efforts to communicate with his patients electronically. He lists many reasons why he decided to take this action, but two stuck out for me. o Patient apathy: Over time, Brewer realized that many patients still preferred to contact him via telephone when they had a problem or needed a consultation. o Inconvenience: Worried about patient privacy laws Brewer installed an expensive system that would have required patients to memorize a new password and jump through a few hoops to contact him. This proved to be a non-starter with patients who preferred to be contacted via plan-vanilla e-mail – despite the fact that it is less secure. In the end, Brewer might have benefited from some basic research. Brewer admitted that he never surveyed his patients to find out if they wanted to communicate with him via e-mail. This was a bad idea. Communications might have been another problem. Did Brewer communicate aggressively about the new service (and its benefits) with his patients? His column indicates that he may not have. Like many others, he thought that if he built it, they would come. Unfortunately, things don’t work that way. Overall, this is an interesting column that sheds light on some of the barriers faced by physicians in smaller practices seeking to use innovative technology. See what readers think of this column by viewing the Wall Street Journal’s online forum. (Source: Envisioning 2.0)

Pew: high speed hesitation continues for low income americans

HealthCareVox — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 15:54:22 +0100

Data from the Pew Internet and American Life project and other sources have long indicated that economics is a major barrier to increased broadband adoption. Now, new data, released by Pew just before the July 4th holiday weekend, suggests that lower income Americans are not likely to get a broadband connection anytime soon. While cost continues to be a major barrier, another factor is that the majority of dial-up users are satisfied with their current level of Internet access. 62% of Americans with dial-up connections have no plans to switch to broadband. See the chart below for more information about Pew’s data (click to enlarge). Another new trend to consider when examining Americans’ Internet use habits is that some companies are thinking about introducing metered pricing – i.e., charging those who use the Internet heavily more. As I noted in this post, if enacted, this pricing strategy may exacerbate the divide between more affluent Americans with robust Internet connections and those without. However, those interested in reaching lower income Americans with health messages using the Internet should not give up hope. There is some evidence that some groups like low-income African Americans access the Internet at the public library or at work. These connections are often faster than the ones they enjoy at home. Health communicators should recognize the many ways that different groups access the Internet and plan their outreach strategies accordingly. kmmad (Source: HealthCareVox)

MedWorm Sponsored Message: Find out how you can get your message across here by sponsoring this MedWorm news feed.

Sermo docs launch an online health reform movement: will it matter?

HealthCareVox — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 21:22:05 +0100

Over the July 4th weekend, expect to see fireworks in a town near you and on your television. Today, a bill that was supposed to institute a 10.6% cut in Medicare payments for doctors was supposed to go into effect. However, after significant opposition from physicians -- and health plans (which oppose cuts in reimbursements for privately managed Medicare advantage plans) -- Congress is set to find a way to restore the cuts. However, both American Medical Association and America’s Health Insurance Plans plan to launch a series of advertisements opposing the bill that will air over the holiday break. While these moves by major advocacy organizations are expected, what’s more surprising is that physicians -- without official support from the American Medical Association –- have taken matters into their own hands. Today, Sermo the physician-only social network announced what it is calling a historic campaign designed to raise “national awareness about the real healthcare issues” facing doctors. More than 5,000 physicians have signed an open letter that highlights the “challenges physicians face in delivering appropriate patient care.” The letter targets three industry players physicians are saying keep them from delivering care to patients: insurance companies, government and malpractice lawyers. You can read the full text of the letter here. (Source: HealthCareVox)

From the health wonk review: the continuing conversation about rising healthcare costs

Envisioning 2.0 — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 20:51:53 +0100

Over the past couple of weeks it seems that rising healthcare costs are getting lots of attention in mainstream media and in the blogosphere. This week’s edition of the Health Wonk Review had an interesting post from InsureBlog’s H.G. Stern on this topic. He talked about Ben Bernanke’s assessment of rising health costs. He said Americans will be spending an increasing amount of their incomes paying for medical expenses. To prevent this, he Bernanke believes that government will have to assume more of the cost burden. Stern disagrees, saying that over time, Americans’ taxes will increase, which ensures that we will be footing the bill either way. But, because I prefer to focus on solutions rather than problems, I was very intrigued by a post by Maggie Mahar over at the Health Care Blog focusing on a solution to our health cost woes. I won’t give away the solution here, but it would involve asking Americans to pay a value added tax that would be specifically designed to fund health costs. (For anyone who has traveled in Canada or Europe the VAT will be very familiar.) It’s a very intriguing solution that Mahar thinks should have the support of both Democrats and Republicans. However, she’s not holding her breath waiting for a bi-partisan solution to our healthcare problems – even though unity is the theme of the hour. (I’m not either.) Overall, there’s lots of interesting policy-related content to read in the latest edition of the Health Wonk Review. You can view it by clicking here. (Source: Envisioning 2.0)

The battle over online content

HealthCareVox — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:13:37 +0100

Earlier this month, the blogosphere – and to a lesser extent the Twittersphere – was blazing with news that the Associated Press was pressing bloggers to take down content it felt was in violation of copyright law. Not only were bloggers annoyed that the Associated Press made this request, but they contended that AP routinely cribbed content from bloggers, but failed to credit them for their work. The Associated Press soon backed down, but the AP-blogosphere flap is only a taste of what some are saying will be a war between producers of user-generated content and the mainstream media. According to BusinessWeek: “The dustup between the AP and bloggers was just an early skirmish in what's likely to become a protracted war over how and where media content is published online. On one side are bloggers and other Web sites eager to ensure continued access to information. On the other are media companies intent on controlling or cashing in on the dissemination of their stories, videos, and other digital media.”Although the latest skirmish has received a lot of attention, the content wars have been going on for a long time – but in a more subdued form. Currently, bloggers, online video users and companies like Google are winning. However, faced with declining ad revenues media companies are actively looking for ways to make money on online content people are used to getting for free. The battle over content coupled with efforts to begin charging Internet users by the megabyte may transform the Internet in profound ways depending on how these trends play out. Will we continue to see information exchanged freely and people using the Internet whenever and however they want? The answer to that question will be determined by all those who have heavily invested in the status quo. Because they will do anything to ensure the online party continues, I’m not sure if things will change that dramatically. However, I could be wrong. (Source: HealthCareVox)

On alli & social media marketing: it’s about efficacy & side effects stupid!

HealthCareVox — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 14:41:55 +0100

Much has been made lately about the poor sales of GlaxoSmithKline’s over the counter (OTC) weight loss medication Alli. The company famously relaunched a low-dose OTC version of its prescription medication Xenical with a snazzy advertising campaign and a branded blog and message board. What surprised many people is that the company freely acknowledged the drug’s messy side effects on the Alli blog. GSK’s hope was that it could get people to make a commitment to changing their dietary habits in order to lose weight and avoid an “oops” moment. Recently, it has become clear that Alli is not doing as well as analysts expected. The problem may be the company’s marketing message. Those willing to make lifestyle modifications may be less inclined to take a pill – especially one like Alli. (Source: HealthCareVox)

Introducing the life sciences profiles of color project

HealthCareVox — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 19:58:37 +0100

MedWorm Sponsored Message: Find out how you can get your message across here by sponsoring this MedWorm news feed.

Introducing the life sciences profiles of color project

Envisioning 2.0 — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 19:10:20 +0100

Last year, I wrote a blog post regarding Nobel Prize winner James Watson’s remarks about the intelligence of people of African descent. Overall, I didn’t expect the post to generate a great deal of attention, as I wrote it in order to get an issue that had been bothering me off my chest. I was pleased to see that a few other bloggers and pharmaceutical marketing publications picked up the post and commented on my thoughts. However, the blog post generated more than words. Last year, John Mack, author of the Pharma Marketing Blog, approached me with an idea: What if we took some steps to highlight the accomplishments of African Americans and other minority groups in the life sciences? I was immediately intrigued by the idea, as it was a direct response to my request that we “show people why they are wrong by citing examples of the quiet, unheralded contributions Blacks are making in business, science, education, law and other areas.” Mack also introduced me to Craig DeLarge of Novo Nordisk, who agreed to participate in the project. Today, I am proud to announce that we have launched a blog, “Life Sciences Profiles of Color,” which is designed to: -Highlight the achievements and contributions of people of color in the Life Sciences industry, and -Encourage and inspire young professionals and students who are considering a career in our industry. To make this project a success we need your help, please consider: -Submitting your story and granting us permission to post your image and responses on this blog -Recommending others you think should be featured on this blog -Sharing news about this blog with your colleagues throughout the industry Over time, we hope to expand our efforts by creating opportunities for people from diverse backgrounds to communicate, network and collaborate. I hope you’ll take the time to learn more about the Life Sciences Profiles of Color project. We are looking forward to hearing from you. To learn more about the blog and the project, please click here. (Source: Envisioning 2.0)

Study suggests culture, not racism may be cause of persistent health disparities

Envisioning 2.0 — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 15:33:13 +0100

Much has been said about the ongoing health disparities between minority groups and whites. While some have attributed these differences to racism, new evidence indicates that disparities may be caused by equality rather than inequality. A new study published in the Archives of Internal Medicine indicates that by treating all patients the same, physicians may be doing people from diverse backgrounds a disservice. Dr. Thomas Sequist, lead author of the study told the New York Times: “It isn’t that providers are doing different things for different patients, it’s that we’re doing the same thing for every patient and not accounting for individual needs. Our one-size-fits-all approach may leave minority patients with needs that aren’t being met.” For example, telling a Hispanic or African American patient that they need to reduce their intake of carbohydrates may not be effective if rice is at the center of their diet. While this study is interesting, it is not highlighting a new problem. For many years medical and public health officials have focused on the need for health providers to become culturally competent. Hopefully this study will accelerate cultural competency efforts by helping us get to the heart of racial and ethnic disparities in care. (Source: Envisioning 2.0)

Pr agencies: please read this post about blogger relations it’s very on-point

HealthCareVox — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 17:02:56 +0100

Recently, because my blog has been listed on a few lists compiled by public relations professionals, I’ve been getting lots and lots of pitches about various health-related products, services and issues. I’d say that 99% of them are not relevant and indicate that the person sending the pitch has no idea about I write about on a regular basis. I’ve been thinking about writing a post about this for a while now, but didn’t want to whine about getting irrelevant pitches. However, I came across a great article by my friend Toby Bloomberg that I just had to pass along. It’s titled: “Blogger Relations: I Don't Need A New Best Friend.” Bloomberg writes: “Lead with what is most valuable to me and my community. Help me understand why I should not only care about the nifty new product or service or book or conference or cruise .. but why I should take the time to write and research the post and dedicate space to promote your client.”Her post is filled with great advice for PR pros and lots of links to resources that will help increase the odds of successfully working with bloggers. For those of you who have me on your blogger outreach lists, I have one piece of advice: Please take the time to read my blog (I have nearly 2 years of posts) and understand what I focus on. If your pitch is relevant to what I write about, you’ll get my attention. If not, it’s going to be immediately deleted.Image Source: MIT (Source: HealthCareVox)

Kaiser partnership gives microsoft a leg up in phr wars

HealthCareVox — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 18:05:03 +0100

Response From Microsoft Added, Please See BelowFor the moment, Microsoft may have the edge in the personal health record (PHR) wars. Yesterday, the company announced that it has initiated a partnership with managed care company Kaiser Permanente. Kaiser will link its PHR system, My Health Record, with Microsoft’s HealthVault. One hundred fifty-six thousand Kaiser employees will participate in the pilot program. What intrigued me about this newest development was the connection Microsoft and Kaiser are making between patients’ health information and physician feedback. HealthVault will provide patients with valuable information about what their medical information means. According to the Microsoft press release: “A distinction between Kaiser Permanente’s online health tool and others offered by insurers is the range and relevance of the information itself: In addition to containing benefits and eligibility information, My Health Manager also is powered by both clinical data entered by physicians, going much deeper than the standard claims-based PHRs on the market. For example, consumers can not only see a record of a test that they had, but also the result of that test and in some cases, direct feedback from their doctors about the result. Since both the patient and physician use the data in My Health Manager, consumers are actively using their Kaiser Permanente PHR to communicate with their physician and support their health goals.”This is why I think Microsoft now has a leg up in the PHR arena. Linking clinical information to advice from a physician makes the PHR much more valuable to patients. However, there is one thing that still bothers me about the Kaiser/Microsoft effort: portability. What happens to all of that wonderful information when someone leaves the Kaiser family? I know of some people who switch providers on a regular basis, so all of this valuable information may be unavailable to them. I’m sure the folks at Microsoft have thought about this, so I’d love to hear from them about this issue. Update: Microsoft spokeswoman Sarah Johnson sent me an answer to my question re: portability. She writes: "Users will be able to store information from their My Health Manager personal health record in their HealthVault record, and have the ability to share it with providers outside of the Kaiser network. And if a patient leaves Kaiser, their health information is in HealthVault and can be taken wherever they go. In addition, users will be able to combine info from the MHM PHR with information from health & wellness devices, like a home BP monitor, for a better picture of their health." (Source: HealthCareVox)

On the rise of the digital economy

Envisioning 2.0 — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 15:23:23 +0100

I came across an interesting editorial in today’s New York Times that I thought was very interesting. Paul Krugman notes that the “predictions of ’90s technology gurus are coming true more slowly than enthusiasts expected — but the future they envisioned is still on the march.” He provides an example of how digital technology is transforming the music industry. Faced with declining revenues from traditional sources, musicians are giving away their main product (music) in exchange for increased touring and licensing fees. Are these trends influencing the health industry in the same way? Perhaps not. Clearly the main products provided by medical professionals will continue to be very highly valued – at least until we have machines that can do a better job. In addition, there is still a great need for people with the ability to gather, analyze and explain various types of health data. So, I don’t see these health-related “products” given away any time soon. However, we are seeing that health professionals are having to react to lay people who are using digital technologies to find and exchange information. This is shaking up the traditional hierarchies within the health industry and we’re still trying to figure out what the impact will be. The unknown road is often the most exciting one, wouldn’t you agree? (Source: Envisioning 2.0)

MedWorm Sponsored Message: Find out how you can get your message across here by sponsoring this MedWorm news feed.

Metered pricing could worsen plight of internet have-nots

HealthCareVox — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 16:24:54 +0100

Believers in the ability of the Internet to improve the health of people from all socioeconomic backgrounds have reason to worry. This week Time Warner announced that it would start offering metered plans designed to charge higher prices for individuals who are heavy users of broadband services. According to MediaPost: “Time Warner this week said it would start a test of metered pricing in Beaumont, Tex. For the Time Warner test, consumers will be able to choose from a range of plans, with prices starting at $29.95 a month for speeds of 768 Kpbs and a 5GB bandwidth cap. The most expensive is $54.90 for speeds of 15 MBps and a monthly cap of 40GB. Customers who exceed their limits will be charged $1 for each extra GB.”This trend has serious ramifications for people who rely on the Internet to find health information. Studies from Pew and other research organizations indicate that low-income Americans are less likely to have Internet access. Yet, the California Healthcare Foundation has reported that “these segments of the public have the greatest need for information that can help them manage their health.” In addition, many of the most robust and useful online technologies (like online video) require reliable high-speed Internet connections. Will the advent of the metered Internet put a damper on efforts to ensure that people with the greatest need have access to the best online health information? Only time will tell. However, this trend is well worth watching and being concerned about. (Source: HealthCareVox)

New studies from patientslikeme showcase power of health social networks

HealthCareVox — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 17:35:00 +0100

I’m back from my time off and have been slowly catching up with non-urgent e-mail and news. One item caught my eye from the e-patients blog focusing on two new studies produced by the social network PatientsLikeMe. This site differs from many others health-social networks because it enables users to input detailed information about their care and share it with others. PatientsLikeMe was featured in a recent New York Times magazine article that you can find here. What’s most interesting about these two studies (focusing on ALS) is that they help to address the unmet need for more data on why health social networks are useful to patients and whether we can learn about health outcomes by mining user-generated information. However, we must also be aware that some patients can quickly become burned out because of the work required to input data about their condition on a regular basis. One former PatientsLikeMe user wrote a letter to the New York Times about the site, saying: “I had decided to delete my profile from the PatientsLikeMe Web site. More than anything, I found it to be a hypochondriac's virtual theme park. Tracking symptoms and entering the information is time consuming and tedious. I just cannot maintain that level of interest in myself. If I ‘fell behind,’ I would routinely receive e-mail messages admonishing me to keep up my data for the good of the community. I do not need that kind of aggravation.I hate being a patient, so I have never been fond of the name.” PatientsLikeMe: The Only “Real” Health Social Network? In a post published on the e-patients blog John Grohol described PatientsLikeMe as “arguably the only ‘real’ health social network online today, because it lets patients share actual data that matters with one another -- their personal health data. (Other supposed health social networks seem more focused on the 'social' than the "health," allowing for little integrated data sharing.)” I’m not sure I agree with Grohol’s point about other health-focused social networks. However, I do think the new PatientsLikeMe studies are groundbreaking and provide important evidence that social networks can have significant clinical, psychological and societal benefits. (Source: HealthCareVox)

Google health beta officially launches

HealthCareVox — Tue, 20 May 2008 16:45:25 +0100

"We're not a healthcare company, nor do we aspire to be one. But, there are lots of companies out there that are vertical domain experts. All of these company's will be able to integrate their platforms, applications and services with Google Health."-Missy Krasner, product marketing manager for Google HealthAfter much fanfare, Google Health was officially launched this week. Michael McBride of Red Orbit is very excited about Google’s latest initiative, saying: “Why does Google Health have the industry all a-twitter? Because, it's the Internet, and if ever there was an invention that appealed to the majority of people, this is it. Studies repeatedly show that the portion of the population using the Internet to research medical conditions and medications is growing rapidly and shows no indication of slowing down.”Although Google has the size and strength to make Google Health a viable tool, it will still have to overcome the obstacles that have prevented personal health records from becoming a widely popular including: 1. Inertia: Will people be interested in using a personal health record from Google if their managed care provider is offering them already? 2. Trust: Who will protect your health information? 3. Fear of Marketing: Although Google is not selling advertising, it reserves the right to do so in the future. How will this stance influence those who are afraid Google will use their information to generate ad revenue? I’ll be looking to see how Google and other companies overcome these problems and will report on my observations in the coming months.In the meantime, explore Google Health by clicking here. It's a bit sparse right now, but Google plans to add new features and partners over the coming months. Brief Blogging Break: As an aside, I'll be taking a brief break from blogging until late next week. Have a happy and healthy Memorial Day weekend! (Source: HealthCareVox)

The health wonk review is up

Envisioning 2.0 — Fri, 16 May 2008 17:02:05 +0100

. . . at the Healthcare Economist. (Source: Envisioning 2.0)