“Health Management Rx has the unique privilege to host the first US-based Dutch Grand Rounds today!
Due to the language barrier (ours, not theirs!), the format of this Grand Rounds will be text heavy - some posts are in English, some in Dutch.
Our Dutch colleagues have kindly translated many Dutch links to English text for us, so content of those posts is included below en total.
Since we have so much great ‘imported’ material to cover, I’ll keep the intro short and sweet.
It’s a privilege to provide inside perspectives from my adopted homeland. This is a rare chance for the American health and medical blogosphere to hear what’s really going on over there in the Netherlands, and how Dutch bloggers view international healthcare fumblings.”
Article
Jen McCabe Gorman, Health Management Rx, 7 October 2008
Tagged: e health and health 2.0
; posted on Tuesday, October 7th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
No Comments »
“After I blogged last week about the Ix role in Health 2.0, it was cross-posted on The Health Care Blog. The post there generated a number of comments representing multiple perspectives.
As is perhaps too common in blogging, I may have gone too quickly and not been clear enough about some of the premises of Ix, particularly with respect to the great importance I place on consumer empowerment and engagement. I also did not provide examples to give a better perspective on what I was describing.”
Article
Josh Seidman, PCHIT Blog, 6 October 2008
Tagged: empowerment, health 2.0 and Ix
; posted on Tuesday, October 7th, 2008 at 7:58 am
No Comments »
“Het elektronisch patiëntendossier (EPD) haalde deze maand de troonrede. Voor de regering is het dit najaar er op of er onder: het landelijk dossier inclusief schakelpunt moet er komen. Een kaderwet met daarin de verplichtstelling dat op 1 september 2009 zorgverleners, huisartsen, apothekers en ziekenhuizen deel moeten nemen aan het landelijk schakelpunt, moet leiden tot het succesvol einde van een langlopend overheidsproject. De Tweede Kamer lijkt minister Klink te steunen, maar tegelijkertijd wijzen steeds meer marktpartijen het landelijk EPD af. Huisartsen, zorgbestuurders en zelf de Raad voor de Volkgezondheid plaatsen kritische kanttekeningen. Online dossiers als Google Health worden als oplossing genoemd. Health2.0-toepassingen lijken het bastion van het EPD te kraken. Een inzicht in de discussie.”
Article (Dutch)
Martijn Hulst, FrankWatching, 26 September 2008
Tagged: Google Health, health 2.0, HealthVault and web 2.0
; posted on Friday, September 26th, 2008 at 8:24 pm
No Comments »
“We had an excellent gala conference dinner at the New Connaught Rooms on Wednesday evening. Due to trying to get things to work properly on the BCS wireless and Ethernet networks, I was not able to take notes on the session by Celia Boyer and Petra Wilson on ‘Trustworthiness in the age of Web 2.0?; however, they covered the Health on the Net code and related issues , and generated discussion of how we might ‘kitemark’ reliable websites that are Web 2.0-based and on which content might be changing rapidly.”
Article
Peter, hi-blogs.info, 25 September 2008
Tagged: europe, health 2.0, patient and web 2.0
; posted on Thursday, September 25th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
No Comments »
“When last week ago I posted my thoughts on what the troubles at Revolution Health signify for “Health 2.o movement” I hoped to initiate a discussion, but did not quite expect to be targeted with personal attacks.
But a serious discussion was certainly started and I am glad that my original post and the ad hominem attack by Matthew Holt unearthed some fundamental issues about the outlook for online health technologies. People should start paying attention to understand what claims they can rely on or not.”
Article
Hippocrates, Trusted.MD, 22 September 2008
Tagged: health 2.0 and health information
; posted on Tuesday, September 23rd, 2008 at 8:00 am
No Comments »
“Is Health 2.0 in demise or not?
This is an opinion column followed by a lively discussion, including a comment from Matthew Holt.
My comment: I don’t think it is.”
Article
Ted Eytan MD, 18 September 2008
Tagged: adoption and health 2.0
; posted on Thursday, September 18th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
No Comments »
“While I have been consistent in criticizing the excessive enthusiasm and hype around so-called “Health 2.0″ movement, I always tried to steer clear of pointing finger at specific companies and individuals.
Why? Because I believe innovators should be encouraged and given benefit of the doubt. Even if their ideas make absolutely no sense. Once in a while even a crazy idea works. On the flip side, once enough hard data is available, ignoring reality can be foolish. Just look at the latest Wall Street meltdown.”
Article
Hippocrates,Trusted MD, 15 September 2008
Tagged: health 2.0 and health information
; posted on Tuesday, September 16th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
No Comments »
“Delivery strategy in a consumer-centric healthcare system focuses on identifying, facilitating, and integrating online and offline communication and care delivery channels needed to reach and coordinate end goals (value) as defined by disparate customer segments (patient, provider, payor, policymaker, caretaker, etcetera).
Services are location independent, time independent, provider de-linked, and value-generating. Rising healthcare costs, increasing chronic conditions, and barriers to access drive the search for a new route to safer, cost-effective quality care.
Health 2.0 is content and community: patients trusting patients. The semantic web sparks Health 2.0 evolution towards more consumer-centric care by enabling viral network growth and increasing personal-usage value of patient-created, “human-to-human” centric networks.
Semantic web technology and open source API development provide opportunities to build consumer-centric services. But the roadmap for true consumer-centric care does not end with semantic web growth – rather it begins there.
The authors present a conceptual roadmap for reaching consumer-centric care at the intersection of two rapidly-evolving developmental axes: joining patients and professionals in the healthcare conversation and combining brick-and-mortar real world systems with virtual online services. Future evolutionary phases Health 3.0 and 4.0 are defined using examples.
The authors provide a model, termed “neXthealth,” which gives stakeholders concrete tools to define their position (using existing service lines and development initiatives) and focus on four critical factors needed to realize complete consumer-centric care: content, community, commerce and coherence.”
Article
Jen McCabe Gorman and Maarten den Braber, September 2008
Tagged: health 2.0 and semantic
; posted on Tuesday, September 16th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
No Comments »
“Jen McCabe Gorman drew a picture at HealthCampDC last that I really liked. Luckily, I found this image of her Medicine 2.0 presentation, so nobody has to decipher my sketch.”
Article
Susannah Fox, The Health Care Blog, 16 September 2008
Tagged: health 2.0
; posted on Tuesday, September 16th, 2008 at 6:29 pm
No Comments »
“Some days ago, Slideshare.net featured the slideshows of the successful Medicine 2.0 Congress.”
Article
Bertalan Meskó, ScienceRoll, 11 September 2008
Tagged: health 2.0, medicine 2.0 and web 2.0
; posted on Friday, September 12th, 2008 at 7:58 am
No Comments »
“Interactive media with user-generated content, often generically referred to as Web 2.0, has taken off in health care in the last couple of years. But with all the options and convenience that blogs, wikis, social networking sites, chat rooms, and message boards have opened up for patients and providers alike, the technology known as health 2.0 or medicine 2.0 is not without risk.”
Article
Neil Versel, Digital Healthcare & Productivity, 9 September 2008
Tagged: health 2.0 and web 2.0
; posted on Wednesday, September 10th, 2008 at 9:21 am
No Comments »
“The traditional meaning of Health 2.0, according to Jane Sarasohn-Kahn’s “Wisdom of Patients” has been the use of social software and light-weight tools to promote collaboration between patients, their caregivers, medical professionals and other stakeholders in health.
An example of this in cancer medicine is Individualized Online Clinical Trial Protocol Version 1.0 by the Weisenthal Cancer Group, a Phase II evaluation of individualized cancer treatment with traditional cytotoxic chemotherapy, targeted anti-kinase drugs and anti-angiogenic agents.
Article
Greg Pawelski, The Health Care Blog, 14 August 2008
Tagged: health 2.0 and oncology
; posted on Friday, August 15th, 2008 at 8:03 am
2 Comments »
“How are Web 2.0 technologies like social networks, wikis and online communities changing the face of the health care industry? How are hospital systems and physician practices evolving as a result of rapid technological change? How can health plans evolve in the face of emerging challenges with the help of new technologies and new thinking? What will come of the recent controversies over genetic testing and the privacy of patient data? Where does the hype over social networks and user-generated content end and the reality begin?”
Article
The Health Care Blog, 13 August 2008
Tagged: health 2.0, networks, web 2.0 and wikipedia
; posted on Thursday, August 14th, 2008 at 8:48 am
No Comments »
Welcome to the 30th edition of Medicine 2.0, the blog carnival devoted to articles that analyze the current and potential impact of web 2.0 technologies on medicine and healthcare.
“Medicine 2.0″ 101
The first question is, of course, “What exactly is Medicine 2.0?”. The second, “Who cares?”. The third, “Why?”
Article
Alvaro, Sharp Brains, 10 August 2008
Tagged: health 2.0, medicine 2.0 and web 2.0
; posted on Monday, August 11th, 2008 at 7:45 am
No Comments »
“I’ve recently come across 5 services that may be useful for those interested in health 2.0.”
Article
Bertalan Meskó, ScienceRoll, 10 August 2008
Tagged: health 2.0
; posted on Monday, August 11th, 2008 at 7:39 am
No Comments »
“I admit to a fascination with Health 2.0. I see it as the place where a lot of the things that look promising in health care and technology are all mashing together.
As a follower of developments in both the health 2.0 movement and the gaming industry, I came across the following article that piqued my interest. It deals with the deal reached between Netflix and Microsoft to facilitate movie downloads to those using the XBOX Live network.”
Article
James A. Cooley, The Health Care Blog, 08 August 2008
Tagged: games, health 2.0 and Health Information Technology
; posted on Saturday, August 9th, 2008 at 7:57 am
No Comments »
“Background: The term Web 2.0 became popular following the O’Reilly Media Web 2.0 conference in 2004; however, there are difficulties in its application to health and medicine. Principally, the definition published by O’Reilly is criticized for being too amorphous, where other authors claim that Web 2.0 does not really exist. Despite this skepticism, the online community using Web 2.0 tools for health continues to grow, and the term Medicine 2.0 has entered popular nomenclature.
Objective: This paper aims to establish a clear definition for Medicine 2.0 and delineate literature that is specific to the field. In addition, we propose a framework for categorizing the existing Medicine 2.0 literature and identify key research themes, underdeveloped research areas, as well as the underlying tensions or controversies in Medicine 2.0’s diverse interest groups.
Methods: In the first phase, we employ a thematic analysis of online definitions, that is, the most important linked papers, websites, or blogs in the Medicine 2.0 community itself. In a second phase, this definition is then applied across a series of academic papers to review Medicine 2.0’s core literature base, delineating it from a wider concept of eHealth.
Results: The terms Medicine 2.0 and Health 2.0 were found to be very similar and subsume five major salient themes: (1) the participants involved (doctors, patients, etc); (2) its impact on both traditional and collaborative practices in medicine; (3) its ability to provide personalized health care; (4) its ability to promote ongoing medical education; and (5) its associated method- and tool-related issues, such as potential inaccuracy in enduser-generated content. In comparing definitions of Medicine 2.0 to eHealth, key distinctions are made by the collaborative nature of Medicine 2.0 and its emphasis on personalized health care. However, other elements such as health or medical education remain common for both categories. In addition, this emphasis on personalized health care is not a salient theme within the academic literature. Of 2405 papers originally identified as potentially relevant, we found 56 articles that were exclusively focused on Medicine 2.0 as opposed to wider eHealth discussions. Four major tensions or debates between stakeholders were found in this literature, including (1) the lack of clear Medicine 2.0 definitions, (2) tension due to the loss of control over information as perceived by doctors, (3) the safety issues of inaccurate information, and (4) ownership and privacy issues with the growing body of information created by Medicine 2.0.
Conclusion: This paper is distinguished from previous reviews in that earlier studies mainly introduced specific Medicine 2.0 tools. In addressing the field’s definition via empirical online data, it establishes a literature base and delineates key topics for future research into Medicine 2.0, distinct to that of eHealth.”
Article
Hughes B, Joshi I, Wareham J, J Med Internet Res 2008;10(3):e23, doi:10.2196/jmir.1056
Tagged: e health, health 2.0 and web 2.0
; posted on Thursday, August 7th, 2008 at 7:06 am
No Comments »
“VistA (Veterans Health Information System and Technology Architecture)” is the VA’s home-grown electronic medical record (EMR). You can read about its complex history at this web site as well as its adoption over the years by other federal agencies (see: VistA & Federal Agencies). There has been some movement in recent months to replace it, despite its history of success, with a proprietary system.”
Article
Bruce Friedman, Lab Soft News, 6 August 2008
Tagged: adoption and health 2.0
; posted on Thursday, August 7th, 2008 at 6:54 am
No Comments »
“Two of the types of tools which are mentioned when people talk about the idea of “Health 2.0? are social networks and wikis.
Social networking sites are springing up fast and they all allow people suffering from the same disease to connect with each other for information sharing, telling their stories, giving each other emotional support and passing on tips and techniques which they’ve found helpful.”
Article
Bob Leckridge, Heroes not Zombies, 4 August 2008
Tagged: health 2.0, social network and wikipedia
; posted on Tuesday, August 5th, 2008 at 8:27 am
No Comments »
“Last week, The Health Care Blog ran two articles about new wiki sites that will develop and continuously update medical information. A wiki is a “content collaborative” that allows anyone (or anyone authorized by the site) to contribute or modify content; Wikipedia is the best known example.”
Article
Brian Klepper, The Health Care Blog, 28 July 2008
Tagged: health 2.0, health information, web 2.0 and wikipedia
; posted on Monday, July 28th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
No Comments »
Abstract
The authors want to show the implication of interactive ICT on patient empowerment, through an overview of some of the key aspects - EHR, telecare and patient networks - all this within the context of recent Health 2.0 developments.
Definitions will be given of both Health 2.0 and Patient 2.0 Empowerment.
Article
Lodewijk Bos, Andy Marsh, Denis Carroll, Sanjeev Gupta, Mike Rees, to be published in the SWWS08 Proceedings, August 2008
Tagged: empowerment, health 2.0, networks, social network, telecare and web 2.0
; posted on Thursday, July 24th, 2008 at 10:35 am
No Comments »
Presentation
W. Scott Erdley, Peter J. Murray, SINI2008
Tagged: health 2.0, phr and virtual
; posted on Friday, July 18th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
No Comments »
“Web 2.0 technologies provide members of the health community - health professionals, health consumers, health carers and medical and health science students - with new and innovative ways to create, disseminate and share information both individually and collaboratively. This phenomenon has been termed Health 2.0. However, Health 2.0 is more than the application of these technologies in the health community; it is a movement that is beginning to transform the nature of health care, particularly in the US.
In this paper we present and explain four Web 2.0 technologies - blogs, wikis, podcasts, and social networks - and look at how these technologies are currently being used by health professionals. We consider the use of Web 2.0 technologies by health consumers to find and share information and to form support communities and then we explore a Web 2.0 pedagogical model that would connect medical and health science students - tomorrow’s health care professionals - with today’s health professionals and health consumers in order to enhance student education through providing collaborative learning opportunities together with ready access to multiple sources of information and expertise.
We conclude with some comments on what Web 2.0 might mean for the future of health care.”
Article
Iain Doherty, HealthCare & Informatics Review Online, 30 June 2008
Tagged: education, health 2.0, social network and web 2.0
; posted on Tuesday, July 15th, 2008 at 9:46 am
No Comments »
“The term Health 2.0 refers to the concept, described by O’Reilly, of Web-based platforms that allow users to reformulate data for their own purposes. The Health 2.0 movement is rapidly gaining steam and traction, propelled by established and startup firms. The efforts displayed at the recent Health 2.0 meeting in San Francisco, convened by Matthew Holt and Indu Sabaiya, were both wide-ranging and narrowly focused. Even so, several end-of-day panelists noted that, at this early stage, Health 2.0’s definitions and translations into practice remain murky and fragmented.”
Article
Brian Klepper, Jane Sarasohn-Kahn, HealthCare & Informatics Review Online, 30 June 2008
Tagged: decision support and health 2.0
; posted on Tuesday, July 15th, 2008 at 9:43 am
No Comments »
“While the term “Web 2.0″ has been in existence since 2003, an understanding of its meaning, implications and potential for application within the health sector and health informatics is still being developed. The purpose of this paper is not, therefore, to provide any definitive answers, but to raise awareness, issues and questions for further discussion and exploration within the global and local health and informatics communities. There are two ways to examine the issues; we can either explore the more generic Web 2.0 tools and technologies that exist and how they might be applied to health informatics, or we can identify health informatics issues, especially ones that might seem intransigent, and explore whether and how Web 2.0 applications and approaches might help us deal with them. This paper concentrates mainly on the former approach as, while Web 2.0 applications have been used by health informaticians, there are, as yet, few Web 2.0 applications specifically designed for use within health and informatics.”
Article
Peter J Murray, Health Care and Informatics Review Online, 30 June 2008
Tagged: health 2.0, Health Information Technology and web 2.0
; posted on Tuesday, July 15th, 2008 at 9:26 am
No Comments »
“At The Deloitte Center, you will find even more details about the web usage of health consumers. Yes, there will be much more patients who seek health-related information on the web and who want to communicate with their doctors via e-mail or Skype.”
Article
Bertalan Meskó, ScienceRoll, 14 July 2008
Tagged: education, health 2.0 and medication
; posted on Tuesday, July 15th, 2008 at 8:47 am
No Comments »
“Is it ready? Is there something for everyone? No, Health 2.0 is in its infancy, as we recently found out. A few months ago, a friend and I plunged in. Using blogs, syndication and social networks similar to Facebook, we developed the ‘’New'’ Prostate Cancer InfoLink. Its resources unite doctors, patients, wives, ministers, government officials –anyone with an interest in prostate cancer.”
Article
Arnon Krongrad, Miami Herald, 6 July 2008
Tagged: health 2.0, oncology, platform and social network
; posted on Tuesday, July 8th, 2008 at 9:31 am
No Comments »
“For several months there has been discussion amongst Health 2.0 companies about the concept of a Health 2.0 Accelerator. It started with Marty Tenenbaum’s introduction of the concept in September 2007. It continued with the discussion at the San Diego meeting in March 2008. Since then conversations and meetings among a small group have continued to define a first cut at what the Health 2.0 Accelerator should be.”
Article
Matthew Holt, Indu Subaiya,The Health Care Blog, 4 July 2008
Tagged: health 2.0
; posted on Saturday, July 5th, 2008 at 8:29 am
No Comments »
“The Internet is redefining the health care industry. Major transformations can be expected because Internet-based technology will deliver certain health care services more effectively and at lower costs. In the near future, much of the information that is currently imparted to consumers by clinicians will be delivered through and by web-based technology. If the web-based tools that deliver this information mature to the point of becoming reimbursable, beyond their current usefulness as value add-ons, the health care industry could experience a dramatic shift.”
Article
Marlene Beggelman, Health 2.0, 1 July 2008
Tagged: adoption, health 2.0, information technology, internet and virtual
; posted on Tuesday, July 1st, 2008 at 9:28 pm
No Comments »
A new forum started 27 June 2008.
Medical Education Evolution is a community for those passionate about innovation within the medical curriculum based on the belief that “renovating” medical education is a necessary component of moving towards patient-directed, consumer-centric care - “what’s next” in health and wellness.
Forum
Tagged: education, health 2.0 and Health Information Technology
; posted on Friday, June 27th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
No Comments »
All Articles (RSS2)
