Medpedia: Who gets to say what info is reliable?Comments on: --

By: » Medpedia Debate Reignites War Over Who Is Most Qualified To Develop & Vet Medical Information Envisioning 2.0

Tue, 09 Feb 2010 05:05:24 +0000

[...] and dissemination. In an impassioned post published recently on e-patients.net, Dave deBronkart took Medpedia to task for restricting access to the site. He wrote: “[W]hat patients need from an online resource is [...]

By: ePatientDave

ePatientDave — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 21:14:20 +0000

@staticnrg For reference my Medpedia post from February: http://is.gd/3pXoC (comments have important dialog)

By: Medpedia Project: molte luci e qualche ombra | Salute 2.0 - Persone, tecnologie e sanità

Fri, 22 May 2009 10:38:49 +0000

[...] ad un paio di questioni poste da e-patient.net – “dove sono i pazienti?“, e “Chi può dire quali informazioni sono affidabili?” – andrebbero chiarite/discusse anche altre questioni, in particolare quale visione/paradigma [...]

By: “Meaningful Use”: a pivotal definition for new-wave medical records systems | e-Patients.net

Sun, 10 May 2009 15:21:10 +0000

[...] Let each constituency say what works for them. Patients shouldn’t say what doctors need, and doctors shouldn’t mandate how patients should and shouldn’t describe things. Warning: experts on both sides should be able to comment on / warn the other about apparent errors. Docs must be able to say “Whoops, you overlooked this,” and patients must be able to say “Whoops, you overlooked this.” (See related discussion of “who will vet the vetters” in “Medpedia: who gets to say what info is reliable?” [...]

By: ePatientDave

ePatientDave — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 18:29:18 +0000

Perfect example: http://medpedia.com is MD-vetted but full of errors. E-patients.net “who gets to say?” http://is.gd/ktNa

By: ePatientDave

ePatientDave — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 19:13:45 +0000

@Doctor_V Analogous to e-patients.net proposal for Amazon-style voting on #medpedia http://is.gd/ktNa #health2con

By: ePatientDave

ePatientDave — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 15:49:06 +0000

@saltzberg Thanks – glad you liked our Feb. discussion abt Medpedia. It was fascinating – 53 comments! http://is.gd/ktNa

By: ePatientDave

ePatientDave — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 05:01:00 +0000

@accarmichael Did you see our vibrant discussion about Medpedia? http://is.gd/ktNa

By: Lisa

Lisa — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 02:17:40 +0000

Hello again and thak you for looking for this. My friend that wanted the answer so badly has the book herslef and just hasn’t come across it yet. As she said, though, it doesn’t really matter, every bit of advice he gives is good for all of us and following some of his suggestions will allow her to more actively participate in her treatment. The CD is great. I make everybody listen to it. I just have to start practicing it myself now.
thank you so much for your time. I hope you have a good night! Lisa

By: e-Patient Dave

e-Patient Dave — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 02:09:57 +0000

Lisa, sorry, I forgot I loaned the book out, so I can’t look it up tonight. I’ll do what I can to get the answer over the weekend. Or perhaps you can go into a bookstore and look in the book’s index to see if the word is in it.

By: e-Patient Dave

e-Patient Dave — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 21:11:33 +0000

Hi Lisa – I don’t have the book with me here at work but I listened to the entire thing on CD twice and I’m almost certain that’s what he said. I also bought the book (can you tell I liked it?) so I’ll check it when I get home tonight.

Here are some links meanwhile – as you say they’re not definitive.

https://www.cancercompass.com/message-board/message/single,32936,3.htm

http://www.healthyhints.org/

http://extratv.warnerbros.com/2009/01/lifechanger_–_david_serven_sc.php

If you don’t hear back by midnight, nag me again. :–)

By: Lisa

Lisa — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 18:45:43 +0000

Is it definitely accurate to say that Dr. Servan-Schreiber had glioblastoma? That would give hope to so many people, but this is the only site/cite I can find that doesn’t just say “bran cancer’ or “brain tumor.”
Is it acknowledged anywhere? It may be that he is intentionally vague about the type he survived in order to give hope to more people.

By: Who gets to say what’s reliable, part 2: A crappy podcast - from an MD’s company | e-Patients.net

Sun, 15 Mar 2009 17:06:43 +0000

[...] been talking here (especially about Medpedia) about the vital question of what constitutes reliable [...]

By: e-Patient Dave

e-Patient Dave — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 20:16:45 +0000

Interesting that this post is now drawing pingbacks from elsewhere.

The link in the previous comment, from Health Content Advisors, has an added note: “My further comment: the patient-created content also needs to be “peer-reviewed”, organized and aggregated in a way that leads to useful analysis by professionals and patients/consumers.”

I, for one, certainly agree. One of the key “Seven Preliminary Conclusions” in the e-patient white paper is #7: the best to improve medicine is to make it more collaborative… more participatory.

By: Headlines for Mar 2-7 | Health Content Advisors

Headlines for Mar 2-7 | Health Content Advisors — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 20:10:16 +0000

[...] » Medpedia: Who gets to say what info is reliable? | e-Patients.net [...]

By: Eileen O'Brien

Eileen O'Brien — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 19:27:05 +0000

@ePatientDave Fascinating take on Medpedia re”who will vet the vetters?” http://tinyurl.com/ar8hzc

By: ePatientDave

ePatientDave — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 18:16:51 +0000

Medpedia http://is.gd/ktNa RT @staticnrg @kevinmd: I’m looking for a compelling topic to write about for my next USA Today op-ed.

By: Harvard and Stanford team up for Medpedia « Pharma 2.0

Harvard and Stanford team up for Medpedia « Pharma 2.0 — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 23:24:46 +0000

[...] For an interesting take (with lots of comments) on Medpedia, see e-patient Dave’s blog post: Medpedia: Who gets to say what info is reliable? [...]

By: SusannahFox

SusannahFox — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 17:08:59 +0000

RT @disruptivewomen Medpedia goes Wiki. Does it Go Far Enough? http://tinyurl.com/b7e8n3 (fuel for this fire: http://is.gd/ktNa)

By: e-Patient Dave

e-Patient Dave — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 05:24:05 +0000

Great to see you here, Ken. Thank you for caring so much that you took time to write this.

So may I ask, do you have an opinion about Medpedia’s policy that only MDs and some biomed PhD’s can approve content for publication?

To be clear, I’m happy to hear whatever your opinion is – you know from our ACOR exchanges how I value your views.