Skip to main content
Category

technology

Jan 02 2019

Pay people for their data – yes, or no?

By healthcare industry, media commentary, politics, technology

I was recently part of a trinity of folks debating the idea of paying people for the data they contribute to the digital economy, in healthcare and in all other sectors. Here’s the full version of the conversation on YouTube, with yours truly taking the “yes” side, Brookings Institution non-resident fellow and UConn professor Niam Yaraghi taking the “no” side, and Jan Oldenburg moderating the debate. It’s an hour long, so pack a lunch! I put together a shortened audio version of the discussion for my Healthcare Is HILARIOUS! podcast, and that’s here. You’re invited to weigh in – share your comments here, or on Twitter or Facebook. On Twitter and Facebook, use the hashtag #fypmdata – **** You Pay Me (for my) Data. There’s a transcript of the entire discussion here: Transcript (in Google Docs) Links related to issues raised during the debate: Dr. Latanya Sweeney, data scientist and data privacy thought leader extraordinaire Data Commons Cooperative Citizen (health data coop) Humantiv (health data coop) #My31/Hu-manity (health data coop) PBS Frontline “The Facebook Dilemma” series (enraging + frightening) “Selling My Health Data? CUT. ME. IN. BITCHES.” – Casey Quinlan’s manifesto on health data brokering UPDATE added Saturday, Nov. 17, to reflect possibility that the universe is reading either my mind, or my Twitter feed (possibly both): Startup Offers To Sequence Your Genome Free Of Charge, Then Let You Profit From It – NPR Some stories revealing the creep factor in digital health data capture and sale: Google gobbling DeepMind’s health app might be the trust shock we need – TechCrunch The quest for identified data: Why some firms are bypassing hospitals to buy data directly from patients – Fierce Healthcare Period-tracking apps are not for women – Vox Intellectual property’s vital role in healthcare’s AI-driven future – Pharmaphorum Startups Plan the Health Data Gold Rush – The Scientist This post originally appeared on the Society for Participatory Medicine blog in November, 2018.

Read More
Apr 03 2017

Democratization of knowledge, healthcare edition

By e-patients, healthcare industry, technology

I was lucky enough to be asked to write the foreword to the 3rd edition of Shared Decision Making in Health Care: Achieving evidence-based patient choice, from Oxford University Press. Here’s the text of that forward. We are at what appears to be a Copernican moment in healthcare, where everything that learned minds thought was true – that the sun revolved around the earth; that miasmas rising from the ground, or humours contained within the human body, caused disease; that only magical beings called doctors could understand or participate in medical care – is being disproved. Medicine stands at a crossroads unlike any other transformation point in its history. As access to information – what I call the democratization of knowledge – has become as simple as the movement of a human finger, the relationship between doctors and the people they care for has undergone a seismic shift. But like many seismic shifts, it’s happening at a level that only those tuned to pick up the signals from it can sense. That I, a patient voice whose only medical knowledge has been acquired as an autodidact with strong research skills, have been asked to write the foreword to the third edition of Shared Decision Making in Health Care is a strong indication that the earth is moving beneath our feet. The knowledge exchange that is the bedrock of shared decision making is creating the mutuality that has been missing in medicine, making a full partnership between doctors and the people they care for finally possible. As is made clear in many parts of this book, building literacy on both sides of the equation is a must for shared decisions – information has to be shared with people in ways they can understand, which makes solid communication skills a must for both patients and…

Read More
Mar 17 2016

Help us, IBM-Dell-Apple. You’re our only hope.

By healthcare industry, technology

I’ve been on the road a lot over the last six months, getting the chance to interact with (and, I hope, influence), audiences in health tech and health policy. There’s so much desire for change, search for innovation, and just straight up “desperately seeking [something]” out there, it’s almost hilarious that no real change/shift/what-have-you has yet occurred in the giant $3-trillion/year-and-rising sucking sound that is the American healthcare system. Which is why I concluded, long ago, that the system would not be re-invented from within, particularly when it comes to the tech side of the party. Since the medical-industrial complex is keeping the fax machine manufacturers of the universe in business, it’s hard not to snort with laughter at tech “innovations” that emerge from inside the complex’s ivory towers. Tech innovation – on both the consumer and the system side – will come from companies with a proven history of delighting ground-level customers. The ones I like to call “people.” Here’s a Casey-ism that will be appearing in a new report on tech in healthcare from The Beryl Institute: “My sense about technology, and whether it’s engagement or system improvement or anything in this zone, I think that the change is going to come from outside the healthcare industry. The solutions are going to be delivered by companies or entities that have a history of putting technology in the hands of consumers (people) and having those consumers (people) say ‘awesome!’ and just start using it.” I don’t think anyone – consumer or clinician – has touched anything related to Electronic Health Records (EHR) tech and said anything resembling “awesome” about the experience. We, as a nation, have thrown $30+ billion at getting our healthcare delivery system into the 21st century, but have so far only seen it get to the point where…

Read More
Mar 16 2016

Help us, IBM-Dell-Apple. You’re our only hope.

By healthcare industry, media commentary, politics, technology

I’ve been on the road a lot over the last six months, getting the chance to interact with (and, I hope, influence), audiences in health tech and health policy. There’s so much desire for change, search for innovation, and just straight up “desperately seeking [something]” out there, it’s almost hilarious that no real change/shift/what-have-you has yet occurred in the giant $3-trillion/year-and-rising sucking sound that is the American healthcare system. Which is why I concluded, long ago, that the system would not be re-invented from within, particularly when it comes to the tech side of the party. Since the medical-industrial complex is keeping the fax machine manufacturers of the universe in business, it’s hard not to snort with laughter at tech “innovations” that emerge from inside the complex’s ivory towers. Tech innovation – on both the consumer and the system side – will come from companies with a proven history of delighting ground-level customers. The ones I like to call “people.” Here’s a Casey-ism that will be appearing in a new report on tech in healthcare from The Beryl Institute: “My sense about technology, and whether it’s engagement or system improvement or anything in this zone, I think that the change is going to come from outside the healthcare industry. The solutions are going to be delivered by companies or entities that have a history of putting technology in the hands of consumers (people) and having those consumers (people) say ‘awesome!’ and just start using it.” I don’t think anyone – consumer or clinician – has touched anything related to Electronic Health Records (EHR) tech and said anything resembling “awesome” about the experience. We, as a nation, have thrown $30+ billion at getting our healthcare delivery system into the 21st century, but have so far only seen it get to the point where it’s partying…

Read More
Dec 07 2015

Internet of Things (IoT) + healthcare = what, exactly?

By healthcare industry, technology

You can’t turn around these days without running into a headline about the Internet of Things (IoT). It seems as if everything from your car to your cardiac pacemaker is talking to everything else on the internet, and we’re all about to Die (because hackers) Live longer (because hackers) If you’re confused about the whole IoT thing, and what it means to healthcare, you’re not alone. As buzzphrases go, “Internet of Things” is having its Andy Warhol 15 minutes of fame on an auto-replay loop right now … but what will the actual interconnectedness of the technology we use in our daily lives deliver to us in the way of helping us live better/healthier lives? Will we find ourselves living out a cautionary “I, Robot” sci-fi tale as we become slaves to our IoT robot masters? The answer is … (wait for it) … “it depends.” And what it depends on is how we humans build and interact with our robot mast … um, the Internet of Things. The biggest challenge is that healthcare, as an industry, sees the people it serves – we’ll call those people “patients” – as the product, not the customer. Which, I think, goes a long way to explaining why this most human of all industry sectors – the one we seek help from when we get sick – has so resolutely resisted becoming digitally accessible/approachable to its customer base. If you need a ride, Uber. If you want to shop, Amazon. If you want dinner, Yelp or BlueApron. If you need a doctor’s appointment … well, you can call the office to make an appointment. Or use the portal (if there is one). Or hit up the local urgent care. But there will be plenty of waiting, and it’s unlikely to be a tech-assisted process…

Read More
Nov 06 2015

Elephants, middlemen, and systems – oh, my!

By healthcare industry, politics, technology

I’ve been MIA here, but I’ve been loud/proud pretty much everywhere else in the last few months. Including here and here.  What follows is a rant based on what I’ve been seeing/doing since last seen on this page. Elephants There’s an old joke that goes like this: “What’s an elephant?” “It’s a mouse designed by a government committee.” There’s also the old “elephant in the room” bromide about topics that are not to be mentioned under any circumstances, despite their obvious impact on the issue under discussion. And the “How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time.” motivational meme, along with the “blind guys describing an elephant” metaphor used to explain the impact of silo-ed thinking. We’re up to our parietal bones in pachyderms in the healthcare transformation discussion. The biggest one – you can call him Jumbo, or you could call him Dumbo – is always in the room. What I call him is Huckster Nation. What do I mean? I mean the underpinning of pretty much all of American culture – the carnival barker sales guy (guy in this usage is gender neutral). We are a nation of flacks, flogging everything from Sham-Wow to space stations, and that includes our healthcare system. Hell, I’m selling myself, or at least I’m offering to rent out the contents of my cranium in exchange for coin of the realm, as are we all, in one way or another. Americans have taken this to the level of a cultural art form, in that we’ve built our national myth around economic freedom. That it works out to be a literal myth for too many of us – income divide, I’m talking to you – is part of what I’m calling out here, but for the moment let’s focus on the carnival barkers sales guys in US healthcare, shall we? I’m taking about…

Read More
Jun 18 2015

UPDATE: Patients ARE smarter (and louder) … here’s proof

By e-patients, healthcare industry, media commentary, technology

It’s been a fun week here in Mighty Casey Media Land. We kicked off the week a little early (on Sunday) – the 411 on that is available here, and some of the social exhaust is available on Storify here and here. One member of the e-patient posse worried that the guy was gon’ have to enter witness protection, given the avalanche of opprobrium aimed his way from the expert-patient community. Thank god. I was worried this guy might need to go into the witness protection program. TY @MightyCasey – #FTW! https://t.co/xIayus5Gao — Hurt Blogger | Britt (@HurtBlogger) June 17, 2015 In an email thread among a group of expert patients working on aggregating and curating patient-useable outcomes reporting tools, Dr. Corrie Painter said she had called the Brookings Institution, the think tank where the author of the US News piece that set my hair on fire does his think-tank thing, and left a terse message on the Governance Studies main line about pontificating patriarchal putzes (technical term). Given my willingness to talk to anyone, any time, if it moves the needle on healthcare system transformation, I went one better and called the *other* number on the guy’s bio page. I expected to wind up leaving a voicemail, but … He. Answered. The. Phone. We talked for about 30 minutes, during which I assured him that I did *not* think that Yelp reviews were the ne plus ultra, or even a thing, when it came to outcome metrics on physicians and other clinical providers of medical services. But, as I pointed out in my “I’m channeling Lewis Black, with boobs, in healthcare here: righteous rage + cutting humor = driving that point home!” post, what real metrics are *available* to patients seeking intel on the expertise and outcomes of the doctors they go to for care? There are PQRS and Physician…

Read More
Jun 14 2015

From the Patients Are Smarter Than You Think Desk …

By e-patients, healthcare industry, media commentary, technology

See this UPDATE, too. Sundays are pretty quiet here in Mighty Casey Media Land. Yeah, there are those Sundays where I read my wall calendar without my glasses on, and totally think it’s Father’s Day when it’s really Flag Day … but that’s about as exciting as it gets most weeks. Today is one of the latter Sundays, where I not only cause a Father’s Day panic on Facebook (yeah, that’s a thing), but also get Twitter DMs that set my hair on fire. Which you know, if you’ve been hangin’ round this water cooler for a while, is never a good thing. This morning, I picked up my phone while I was waiting for my coffee to brew, and what ho – a DM from my friend HealthBlawg with a link to a “stupid patients, don’t Yelp doctors” piece on US News with the headline “Online Doctor Ratings Are Garbage.” The piece is by Niam Yaraghi, whose pieces on US News usually have me nodding along in full agreement … but not this time. In the “don’t Yelp, bitch” piece, Yaraghi essentially tells people they’re too stupid to understand medical care’s value and outcomes, that we should just lie back and think of England and let those nice doctors do their work. Let’s take ’em in order, shall we? Patients are neither qualified nor capable of evaluating the quality of the medical services that they receive. Seriously?? Does Yaraghi know any cancer patients, or people with MS, or ALS, or rheumatoid disease, or diabetes? I’m pretty sure the answer there is “no,” that he knows a whole bunch of polysyllabic “experts” due to his work at Brookings, but very few ASPs (Actual Sick People). The patient community is teaching the clinical community constantly about both medical research and business operations. I’ll say it again: input from the patient community is, daily,…

Read More
Apr 21 2015

Security vs. access: threading the needle

By healthcare industry, media commentary, politics, technology

The annual big-data party known as the HIMSS conference played out in Chicago – and online – last week. During the event, one of the central issues that arose in the social media conversation under the #HIMSS15 tag involved the one facing patients trying to access their health records, either digitally or on old-school paper: the security/access conundrum. Data that’s accessible to a patient could also wind up accessible to Romanian hackers (you’ve heard me on this topic before), and efforts at making patient data “secure” mean that data is often secure from the patient whose data it is. Patients give their forehead some serious keyboard every day over that one. The folks over at Software Advice released a report on HIPAA breaches on March 12*, which I only caught up with when I returned from my Mighty Mouth 2015 Tour of Info-Sec and Right Care. Full disclosure, I’m quoted in the report, but that’s not why I’m talking about it here. Here’s my biggest takeaway from the piece: 54% of the patients surveyed for the report would consider ditching a healthcare provider if that provider had a breach. Most Patients Would Switch Providers After Breach   Key findings in the report: Forty-five percent of patients are “moderately” or “very concerned” about a security breach involving their personal health information. Nearly one-quarter of patients (21 percent) withhold personal health information from their doctors due to data security concerns. Only 8 percent of patients “always” read doctors’ privacy and security policies before signing them, and just 10 percent are “very confident” they understand them. A majority of patients (54 percent) are “moderately” or “very likely” to change doctors as a result of a patient data breach. Patients are most likely to change doctors if their medical staff caused a data security breach, and least likely to change doctors if hackers were…

Read More
Close Menu