Common Sense - Latest Comments

Re: Linda Pourmassina, MD – The MDigitalLife Interview

Greg Matthews — Wed, 09 May 2012 11:52:42 -0000

Thanks so much, Justin!! I totally agree ... I also chose my doctor because a) he blogs and tweets about health issues he knows and cares about and b) the stuff he writes is really useful. The really cool part about that is that I think it gives us a little bit of extra insight into who our doctor is and how they think ... which can only help when it comes to being partners in managing my health.

Re: Linda Pourmassina, MD – The MDigitalLife Interview

Justin Walsh — Wed, 09 May 2012 10:27:15 -0000

Love this interview. I primarily chose Dr. Pourmassina because of her connectedness, which showed a side of her not generally seen in a 10-15 minute interaction.

Re: HealthCare SocialMedia Review #3: The Digital Doctors Edition

Anneliz Hannan — Mon, 07 May 2012 14:30:11 -0000

Nice review to view. Thanks

Re: There is Still Value in the Content at Social Media Conferences

Billy Delaney — Sat, 05 May 2012 22:24:58 -0000

Good recap. Interesting to read how others see the same event. I have read several posts, and it is very interesting to see what they highlight. I can relate to being on, and then down before and after a speech. Billy

Re: Writing for Short-Form Media

MikeGrace — Fri, 04 May 2012 13:22:53 -0000

Enjoyed the Podcast. Thanks for sharing.

Re: HealthCare SocialMedia Review #3: The Digital Doctors Edition

Healthsprocket — Thu, 03 May 2012 14:40:40 -0000

To get a first hand account of physicians using social media, check out the physicians listed in the health sprocket list; Ten Physicians to Follow on Twitter (2012) bit.ly/KbHGPr

Re: HealthCare SocialMedia Review #3: The Digital Doctors Edition

Marie Ennis-O'Connor — Wed, 02 May 2012 14:25:01 -0000

Great line up! Thanks for including my post on physicians using social media to brand and market their practice - it is great to see the examples of those doctors who are leading the way in their field.

Re: Joining the WCG Book Club

nickhuhn — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:53:29 -0000

Sweet! Where do I send my $19.95 for a pre-order?

Re: Joining the WCG Book Club

Kyle F Flaherty — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 11:32:25 -0000

I can't wait to read this book!

Re: TedMed Live

The Angry Medic — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:36:57 -0000

Bloody hell. I eating cereal when I read this and was like "TEDMED? That can't have anything to do with TEDTalks can it?" Then I read the whole thing and spewed cereal out of my mouth just like the stick figure in the meme.

I think that's an AMAZING idea. Healthcare is so often not as sexy as its bigger, healthier, Armani-wearing cousins Politics and Business, but it most certainly needs to be treated (apologies for bad pun) just the same.

Re: How Patients Bet Their Lives on Survival Statistics

Brian Reid — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 17:03:36 -0000

Jody --

Thanks for the comment. I agree that asking people hypothetical questions is dangerous. *BUT* I think there are a lot of areas in which doctors (and, indeed, the whole system) doesn't communicate well, and I think study gets at some of that.

It shows, in part, that patients place a high value on "hope." But -- and I think this gets to your concern -- it also suggests that patients tend to gloss over the negatives. In the coin-flip example that so many people liked, I imagine a lot of people dismissed the downside of the "bet." (Just like how -- and you know this better than I -- people tend to underestimate the impact of side effects or the burden of trying just one more regimen.)

Re: How Patients Bet Their Lives on Survival Statistics

Jody Schoger — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:15:52 -0000

This is great, Brian.

Let me add a couple of points to an already awesome post:

1) Hypothetical is never reality, especially in cancer. My mother-in-law used to think that if she asked her doctor what he'd recommend for his own wife that she'd really forced the doctor to tell the truth.

That is a myth. The doctor has no idea what he'd recommend for his wife or for himself until is the person sitting naked, covered by a flimsy cotton gown, on a paper covered examining table. No one has a clue. Until you're there. My bet, which is what was demonstrated in the article, is that when fear (and not enough information) prevails patients will choose the sky-high, all-or-nothing approach.

2) Does the "hopeful gamble" change if the patient has already undergone treatment? That's another important question. If you've had chemo - repeatedly - there reaches a point where it's hard to believe that more of the same really WILL extend survival by such a significant amount.

Obviously they NEVER would have let me participate in this kind of study! In this past year I've seen too much - too many people die who had treatment almost until their last breath. Consequently your post, and the findings, show me how much work we have to do.

Thanks so much for writing this -

jms

Re: Going Beyond The ‘Curator’s Code:’ Context is as Vital as Attribution

Therese Torris — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 02:48:35 -0000

I fully agree with you Brian. I curate content on Scoop.it. I often find it difficult to retrace the original source of articles because of multiple layers of curation by curators who do not care for pointing to the original author. I also find a lot of too extensive quotes that kill the need to read more. Careful curation, the way you practice it, is a lot of work. Too much for most people, I'm afraid...

Re: Going Beyond The ‘Curator’s Code:’ Context is as Vital as Attribution

Brian Reid — Thu, 12 Apr 2012 23:21:27 -0000

I'd love to start a flame war with you, but I don't disagree. I think that the attribution *is* important. But my worry is that as sharing becomes more popular and more frictionless, the benefits of curation have a potential to decline if the volume ramps up with little context behind it. Getting a dozen RTs of a New York Times story from my friends does me little good *unless* each of those friends adds a bit of context: what they liked, what they didn't, how that meshes with their understanding of the subject. Getting the attribution right is a fundamental part of the ethics, but adding value should be just as prized.

Re: Going Beyond The ‘Curator’s Code:’ Context is as Vital as Attribution

Greg Matthews — Thu, 12 Apr 2012 16:43:59 -0000

Brian, your take on the down-side of curation really got me thinking. I must confess that I hadn't thought about the concept from this angle before. And while I understand the potential for generating noise in the system, I don't think that the problem necessarily looks the way you've painted it - at least not where it matters. Here's why:

While the source of the story finds it easy to look out over the interwebs to see all of the fascinating places that her story has gone, I as the reader am more likely to receive it through a friend or two on twitter or facebook. Because my facebook and twitter friends act as my "filter" for information (after all, I am connected with them online because we have some kind of real-life affinity), I'm actually really pleased to see it coming from them - because it's likely that if it was interesting to them, it'll be interesting to me, too. Thus, what looks like noise "from the top of the chain" looks like a nicely personalized delivery to me on the bottom of the chain.

I'm going to syndicate this article to my friends on facebook and twitter and see if they complain. ;-) Thanks for being thought-provoking - as usual.

Re: How Social Networks Are Changing Patients … And Medicine

eHealthMe.com — Thu, 12 Apr 2012 14:51:38 -0000

An insightful article.

I bring this up because I think this is closely related: eHealthMe.com. And I believe this is a sustainable model!

(disclaimer: I work in the company)
Johnson

Re: PR Disasters: Death by 1,000 Cuts Can Begin with a Single Nick

Greg Matthews — Fri, 06 Apr 2012 13:36:40 -0000

Love the thinking here, Brian. It's really interesting that the pendulum is swinging this direction in the media ... a few months ago, brands were getting hysterical if anyone said anything bad about them. Hoping that the WSJ's perspective here doesn't become the norm ... because you're absolutely right. When a company has a brush with danger as these three have, they should be asking themselves a few important questions:

1. Did I respond well to this particular issue (i.e., did I recognize it quickly, fix it and communicate proactively about it to the public)?

2. Do I have a *proactive* crisis management protocol that has a strong component of digital associated with it (i.e., do I understand my most likely issues? Do I know what keywords people use when they talk about them? Do I know who is likely to influence public perception, both for and against me?)?

3. Most importantly, have I learned everything that I need to learn about my business, and corrected any inherent flaws in my operation?

If people begin to brush off online issues and ignore the questions above, I think that it bodes ill for their long-term business.

Thanks for sharing your thinking.

Re: Too Young for Facebook?

Mike Hale — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 21:49:47 -0000

I'm getting the same from our 11 year old. So far just telling him the TOS say you have to be 13 has worked, but some of his friends already have a profile. It's a tough call!

Re: Too Young for Facebook?

Lisa Rosenberg — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 13:19:23 -0000

Great blog Matt. I'll keep handy for when Sam and Jacob start pleading their case :)

Re: The Three Biggest Issues Facing Social Analytics Professionals

Patrick Donnelly — Tue, 27 Mar 2012 13:46:43 -0000

great slide deck

Re: Influence: Online and Offline Worlds Collide

Patrick Donnelly — Tue, 27 Mar 2012 00:01:21 -0000

I've never seen an interactive infographic like this. You guys should post to Visual.ly or other design blogs as well. -Patrick

Re: The Three Biggest Issues Facing Social Analytics Professionals

danny.skarka — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 19:22:47 -0000

Klout slide. Perfect.

Re: Finding Out What Patients Really, Really Want

Brian Reid — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 13:24:50 -0000

Oh no! This is genius stuff. I may have to append it to the post. The more voices on this, the better ...

Re: Finding Out What Patients Really, Really Want

Jody Schoger — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 12:48:00 -0000

Brian,
Thanks so much for this. I was so glad to meet all of you at SXSW and enjoy your panel. I was honored to be part of the first epatient panel at Stanford 2.0 last September as well - where we just scratched the surface of knowledge that patients provide.

And yes, you can count me in:)
jms

Re: Finding Out What Patients Really, Really Want

SusannahFox — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:58:03 -0000

Hi Brian,

Do you know about Lucien Engelen's "Patients Included" badge (and manifesto)?

http://lucienengelen.posterous...

Stanford Medicine X is the first conference site I've personally seen sporting the badge.