Doctors are making house calls via texting, blogs and social networks like Facebook and Twitter.
Medical practices are increasingly putting up Facebook pages to promote business and solder their community of patients. By adding social media, pediatricians and clinics are now capturing teenagers, some of their most elusive patients. Unlike younger children, who may see pediatricians several times a year, teenagers visit doctors infrequently. Generally healthy, they may stop by only for health forms for work permits, driver’s licenses and sports teams.
But even as they insist on their growing independence, conflating privacy with secrecy, teenagers can be vulnerable to high-stakes, impulsive behavior. Monitoring them carefully but respectfully is tricky for doctors as well as parents. So while a decade ago practitioners saw the Internet as the enemy, a tool for demanding patients who brandished printouts during visits and called at all hours with obscure questions, adolescent-medicine specialists and pediatricians are now turning technology to their advantage.
The payoff, say doctors who text, tweet and post, is a better-informed teenager who finds social media a faster and less embarrassing means to have questions asked and answered.
You have the right to access your health records. You may view or receive copies of your records, or instead request a summary of the information. Ask for an “authorization for the release of information” form. Complete the form and return it to the facility as directed. Most facilities do charge for copies. The fee can only include the cost of copying (including supplies and labor), as well as postage if you request the copy to be mailed. It can take up to 60 days to receive your medical records, so ask when you can expect to receive the information you requested.
A recent end-of-year review compiles and presents 2012’s most significant mHealth research. The studies were predominantly systematic reviews and
A recent end-of-year review compiles and presents 2012’s most significant mHealth research. The studies were predominantly systematic reviews and meta-analyses, though two were published results from randomized control trials. Most aim to substantiate the clinical value of mHealth interventions in the treatment of various diseases, though several focus on developing best practice guidelines for developing an mHealth rollout strategy.
The concepts of ‘self-tracking’ and the ‘quantified self’ have recently begun to emerge in discussions of how best to optimise one’s life. These concepts refer to the practice of gathering data abo...
The advent of digital technologies able to assist in the collecting, measuring, computation and display of these data has been vitally important in promoting the cause of the self-tracking movement. While people have been able to monitor and measure aspects of their bodies and selves using non-digital technologies for centuries, mobile digital devices connected to the internet have facilitated the ever more detailed measurement and monitoring of the body and everyday life in real time and the analysis, presentation and sharing of these data.
The mobile health (mHealth) space, especially as it relates to health behavior change and chronic and infectious disease management, has been a long running theme of mine for increasing reach, effectiveness, efficiency and equity of interventions.
Webicina aims to help physicians enter the web 2.0 era with quality medical information and selected online medical resources. PeRSSonalized Medicine is the simplest, free, customizable, multi-lingual aggregator of quality medical resources in social media. Please let us know if you have suggestions and watch the tutorial.
72 percent of European online consumers (ages 18 and older) are social health users*. According to the new Cybercitizen Health® Europe 2012 study from healthcare market research and advisory firm Manhattan Research, 44 percent of European online consumers used social networking websites for health, 33 percent read or posted patient testimonials and 34 percent used health ratings or reviews. The study surveyed 3,020 consumers (ages 18 and older) in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom online in October 2012, on their use of digital media and technology for health and its influence on treatment and product decisions.
Additionally, the study found that adoption of social media for health varies by country. For example, compared with the other surveyed countries online consumers in Spain and Italy are most likely to use Facebook for health, while health ratings and reviews see strongest adoption in Germany.
Social health users by country (percent is among those who are online in each country):
“A large share of EU consumers is accessing health information from social feeds,” said Principal Analyst Christina Anthogalidis. “Although dedicated health communities have been struggling for consumer participation for years, health threads on general platforms are finally driving the adoption of social health feeds. We believe this finding is pointing at a significant shift in the EU online health content market.”
*Social health users have conducted any of the following activities online for health within the past 12 months: used a community, group or social networking website, or conducted any social-related activity online such as reading or posting on health blogs, message boards or health ratings websites.
’m a physician and have spent a lot of time over the years attending Medical Conferences talking to my colleagues about stuff we can do for and to patients. As I look back on these meetings, I must say, with few exceptions, the folks we were talking about – the patients – were not there.
Here’s a recent example. I attended a Patient Engagement panel at a big conference on Accountable Care Organizations in Washington DC this summer. There were four speakers and a moderator – all health care people – not a patient in sight. Imagine spending an hour or so debating how to engage patients when there were no actual patients on the panel. Pretty funny, except it isn’t.
Some folks would argue that we are all patients, so why do we need more patients to attend medical meetings. Because, I would argue, even though I am a patient and my doctor and nurse friends are patients, we are also health professionals. We understand the jargon. We know what to expect from the illness and the treatment. We know how to work the system. And, probably most significant of all, our doctors know we are doctors and nurses and they treat us differently.
The theorization of health issues is crucial both for understanding and as a guide for action.
The new mobile wireless computer technologies and social media applications using Web 2.0 platforms have recently received attention from those working in health promotion as a promising new way of achieving their goals of preventing ill-health and promoting healthy behaviours at the population level. There is very little critical examination in this literature of how the use of these digital technologies may affect the targeted groups, in terms of the implications for how individuals experience embodiment, selfhood and social relationships. This article addresses these issues, employing a range of social and cultural theories to do so. It is argued that m-health technologies produce a digital cyborg body. They are able to act not only as prostheses, but also as interpreters of the body. The subject produced through the use of m-health technologies is constructed as both an object of surveillance and persuasion, and as a responsible citizen who is willing and able to act on the health imperatives issuing forth from the technologies and to present their body/self as open to continual measurement and assessment. The implications of this new way of monitoring and regulating health are discussed.
But before I went into quiet mode, I recorded a podcast with Fran Melmed and Carol Harnett, hosts of the CoHealth Checkup. They elicited some stories I haven’t told elsewhere and I talked about some of the new data coming out of Pew Internet’s 2012 health survey.
Listen to internet radio with CoHealth Checkup on Blog Talk Radio
I also talked about a trend that I hope is going to catch on: researchers taking responsibility for the translation and spread of their insights to the public, as H. Gilbert Welch does in this video:
For over 2 years, Symplur has collected health conversations on Twitter. From a humble start, our infrastructure has grown and matured to scale with the tr
For over 2 years, Symplur has collected health conversations on Twitter. From a humble start, our infrastructure has grown and matured to scale with the tremendous growth of healthcare social media. We’re now approaching 150 million health tweets in our database which we analyze and categorize by thousands of variables. And similarly with other repositories of big data, our greatest challenge is to figure out how to present insights from such a vast dataset in a meaningful way. The answer is often found in visualizations.
We plan to start a small series of short posts displaying some of this data in a visual way.
What you see in the video below is a 22-month timeline of about 2,000 different health communities and topics each visualized as a bubble. In total, about 100 million healthcare tweets are represented in this visual. The green dots symbolize patient-centric topics, while pink encompasses more professional/provider topics. Larger bubbles signify larger volume of conversations within that community. The data is visualized dynamically over the this 22-month time period starting September 2010.
(2012). CRITICAL QUESTIONS FOR BIG DATA. Information, Communication & Society: Vol. 15, A decade in Internet time: the dynamics of the Internet and society, pp. 662-679.
The era of Big Data has begun. Computer scientists, physicists, economists, mathemati- cians, political scientists, bio-informaticists, sociologists, and other scholars are clamoring for access to the massive quantities of information produced by and about people, things, and their interactions. Diverse groups argue about the potential benefits and costs of ana- lyzing genetic sequences, social media interactions, health records, phone logs, govern- ment records, and other digital traces left by people. Significant questions emerge. Will large-scale search data help us create better tools, services, and public goods? Or will it usher in a new wave of privacy incursions and invasive marketing? Will data ana- lytics help us understand online communities and political movements? Or will it be used to track protesters and suppress speech? Will it transform how we study human communi- cation and culture, or narrow the palette of research options and alter what ‘research’ means? Given the rise of Big Data as a socio-technical phenomenon, we argue that it is necessary to critically interrogate its assumptions and biases. In this article, we offer six provocations to spark conversations about the issues of Big Data: a cultural, techno- logical, and scholarly phenomenon that rests on the interplay of technology, analysis, and mythology that provokes extensive utopian and dystopian rhetoric. Keywords Big Data; analytics; social media; communication studies; social network sites; philosophy of science; epistemology; ethics; Twitter (Received 10 December 2011; final version received 20 March 2012)
E-health is concerned with promoting the health and wellbeing of individuals, families and communities, and improving professional practice through the use of information management and information and communication technology. In autumn 2010 the RCN, supported by an information technology consultancy, carried out a survey of members’ views on e-health to assess their involvement in, and readiness for, e-health developments and their knowledge of its benefits. A total of 1,313 nurses, midwives, healthcare support workers and pre-registration students from across the UK responded. This article describes ways in which nurse managers can influence the successful implementation of the survey recommendations.
Background: People with long-term conditions are encouraged to take control and ownership of managing their condition. Interactions between health care staff and patients become partnerships with sharing of expertise. This has changed the doctor-patient relationship and the division of roles and responsibilities that traditionally existed, but what each party expects from the other may not always be clear. Information that people with long-term conditions share on Internet discussion boards can provide useful insights into their expectations of health care staff. This paper reports on a small study about the expectations that people with a long-term condition (diabetes) have of their doctors using information gleaned from Internet discussion boards. Objective: The aim of this study was to ascertain what people with diabetes who use Internet discussion forums want from their doctors. The study objectives were to identify what people with diabetes (1) consider their role in condition management, (2) consider their doctor’s role in managing their condition, (3) see as positive elements of their interactions with medical staff, and (4) find problematic in their interactions with medical staff. Methods: The study used qualitative methodology to explore the experiences, views, and perceptions of individuals participating on 4 Internet message boards. Posts made on the discussion boards were analyzed using the principles of qualitative content analysis. The meanings of sections of data were noted using codes that were developed inductively; those with similar codes were merged into subcategories and related subcategories were combined to form categories. Results: The key themes identified in the study were ownership of condition management, power issues between people with long-term conditions and doctors, and ways in which people seek to manage their doctors. Conclusions: People with diabetes valued doctors who showed respect for them and their knowledge, and were willing to listen and openly discuss their options. Patients felt that they could and should take responsibility for and control of their day-to-day disease management. They saw doctors as having a role in this process, but when this was lacking, many people felt able to use alternative means to achieve their goal, although the doctor’s function in terms of gatekeeping resources could create difficulties for them in this respect