Health and Medical News and Resources

General interest items edited by Janice Flahiff

Google Glass, iWatch and IBM Watson Revolutionizing The Practice of Medicine

ScienceRoll

People have been thinking about the potential ways Google Glass could be used in medicine and healthcare. Even though it will probably be bad for your eyes, early testers seemed to love using it and didn’t feel it would distract them from anything. A few examples how it could be used in the future:

  • Displaying the patient’s electronic medical records real-time.
  • Assisting the doctor in making the diagnosis with evidence-based and relevant information from the medical literature.
  • Recording every operation and procedure from the doctors perspective. Every movement of doctors will be archived and screened for potential mistakes. (I know it’s harsh.)
  • Based on the lab tests of the patient, it will give an estimated prognosis and suggest next steps in the treatment.
  • Live consultations with colleagues as they will be able to see what I see live.
  • It will guide users through all the steps during an emergency…

View original post 212 more words

March 22, 2013 Posted by | health care | , , , , | Leave a comment

Kent Bottles Private Views: Health Hackers & Citizen Scientists Shake Up Medical Research

English: Copy of Figure 1 describing the healt...

Click on figure to enlarge

Copy of Figure 1 describing the health care model of Health 2.0
Emerging Patient-Driven Health Care Models: An Examination of Health Social Networks, Consumer Personalized Medicine and Quantified Self-Tracking, Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 492-525; doi:10.3390/ijerph6020492Author – Swan M

Kent Bottles Private Views: Health Hackers & Citizen Scientists Shake Up Medical Research

From the 5 December 2011 blog item by Dr. Bottles

Whether you call it Health 2.0, Medicine 2.0, or e-Health 2.0, the Internet is changing medicine in ways that challenge the status quo. This article explores how a group of amateurs who call themselves “health hackers” and “citizen scientists” are trying to use the Internet to connect with other patients, run experiments, and conduct clinical trials on their own diseases.

Dr. Gunther Eysenbach states “Medicine 2.0 applications, services and tools are Web-based services for health care consumers, caregivers, patients, health professionals, and biomedical researchers, that use Web 2.0 technologies as well as semantic web and virtual reality tools, to enable and facilitate specifically social networking, participation, apomediation, collaboration, and openness within and between these user groups.” One review examined 46 different definitions of Health 2.0, and Eysenbach’s definition does not emphasize a key component of the concept:amateurs can use these new Internet tools to do work that in the past was only done by professionals. (1)

 …

The tension between the traditional approach to medical research and patient-initiated research can only be resolved by cooperation and two-way communication between the two groups. The Mayo Clinic and PXE examples clearly show that both groups can benefit by meaningful and respectful partnership. The AIDS and ALS examples demonstrate that patients with few options and new Internet tools will continue to push the traditional research community to be open to new ideas, new approaches, and new possibilities. Gilles Frydman, founder of the Association of Cancer Online Resources, has stated, “Better-informed people are more willing to participate in the advancement of science. Those patients taking Gleevec do not consider themselves guinea pigs. They are recipients of experimental medicine.” (8)

Read the entire blog item

December 24, 2011 Posted by | Medical and Health Research News | , , , , , | Leave a comment

The rise of citizen scientists and patient initiated research

English: Copy of Figure 1 describing the healt...

Emerging Patient-Driven Health Care Models: An Examination of Health Social Networks, Consumer Personalized Medicine and Quantified Self-Tracking, Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 492-525; doi:10.3390/ijerph6020492

by KENT BOTTLES, MD in an article at KevinMD.com

Whether you call it Health 2.0, Medicine 2.0, or e-Health 2.0, the Internet is changing medicine in ways that challenge the status quo. This article explores how a group of amateurs who call themselves “health hackers” and “citizen scientists” are trying to use the Internet to connect with other patients, run experiments, and conduct clinical trials on their own diseases.

Dr. Gunther Eysenbach states “Medicine 2.0 applications, services and tools are Web-based services for health care consumers, caregivers, patients, health professionals, and biomedical researchers, that use Web 2.0 technologies as well as semantic web and virtual reality tools, to enable and facilitate specifically social networking, participation, apomediation, collaboration, and openness within and between these user groups.” One review examined 46 different definitions of Health 2.0, and Eysenbach’s definition does not emphasize a key component of the concept: amateurs can use these new Internet tools to do work that in the past was only done by professionals….

Charles Blanke, MD, Director of Gastrointestinal Oncology at the Oregon Cancer Institute summarizes the advantages and disadvantages of their patient-initiated approach:

This is powerful and compelling work! I remain incredibly impressed by the data-coordinating abilities of the Life Raft personnel. I see the major purpose of this sort of data as hypothesis generating. Unfortunately, it cannot be free of bias and thus cannot stand by itself, but it certainly can point investigators and the Company in the right direction and let us know what we need to be looking at more closely. Thus, its importance cannot be overstated….

,,,The tension between the traditional approach to medical research and patient-initiated research can only be resolved by cooperation and two-way communication between the two groups. The Mayo Clinic and PXE examples clearly show that both groups can benefit by meaningful and respectful partnership. The AIDS and ALS examples demonstrate that patients with few options and new Internet tools will continue to push the traditional research community to be open to new ideas, new approaches, and new possibilities. Gilles Frydman, founder of the Association of Cancer Online Resources, has stated, “Better-informed people are more willing to participate in the advancement of science. Those patients taking Gleevec do not consider themselves guinea pigs. They are recipients of experimental medicine.”…

December 11, 2011 Posted by | Health News Items | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Mobile Health Slideshow and Infographics (with related resources)

From the November 28th 2011 Science Roll blog item by Dr. Bertalan Mesko

Since around 2009, it has been quite clear that mobile phones would not only change the way we check healthcare information online, but the way we do anything online so relevant statistics and analyses are crucial in order to be able to analyze the situation and draw useful conclusions. I’ve recently come across a great presentation focusing on mobile health by Daniel Hooker, health librarian.

And Andrew Spong shared an infographics by Manhattan Research that presents the state of mobile health. 85% of people use social media for health-related reasons on mobiles. Click on the image for larger version.

Related Resources 
  • Health Apps (free and low cost) at jmflahiff.wordpress.com

November 28, 2011 Posted by | Educational Resources (High School/Early College(, Health Education (General Public), Librarian Resources | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Why do I like Google+ even in Medicine?

Why do I like Google+ even in Medicine?.

Blog posting  by Dr. Bertalan Meskó in Science Roll: A doctor’s journey in genetics PhD and medicine through Web 2.0

Excerpts:

I’ve been playing around Google+ for the last couple of days and I have to admit it I really love it. Why? I’ve been using Facebook as a source of professional information but I have to add those people I like to follow as friends even if in most cases we are not friends. A few reasons why I useGoogle+ now for this purpose.

  • In Google+, we can easily create circles and start following people who we are not friends with.
  • It’s easy to determine who can see the information I share (everyone, only circles, only people in my contact list)
  • All Google tools are integrated.
  • I can search for people with specific words in their biographiesthrough Google.
  • I can use Spark for following expressions.
  • It might make it simpler to create private circles so then medical communication can take place.
  • I can see the notifications even in GMail or GDocs.

This is a real professional networking site, while Facebook is just a playground for friends.

For more details and tricks, here is the Complete Google Plus Cheat Sheetinfographics.

A Medical Librarian’s take on Google+ 

Excerpts from the Krafty Librarian blog item – More on G+

I am on Google+ and I am not sure if I like it.  I am sporadically kicking the tires, testing it out.

Here are some reasons I like it:

  • I like having everything Google together.  Iam not sure if I like how it brings up another window when I click the links to my email, calendar, docs, etc. on the Google bar, but I am not sure what work better.
  • I like the idea of Hangout, but I can only use it at home because it requires me to install a Google plugin and I don’t have a microphone or camera on my work computer.  I can see it being used for web conferencing and other professional things.  I tried Hangout one weekend but nobody in my Circles were hanging out so I really couldn’t test it.  I think I would Hangout more if I could do it on my phone.  I would also like to know if I could Hangout with people outside of my circle.  For example, I would like to attend topical Hangouts but I may not want to add those people to my circles.
  • Setting up your circles is much more intuitive and easier than setting up friend lists in Facebook.  It is really easy to do, you can click multiple people, drag and drop and easily create new circles.  The Facebook friends lists were always something sort of hidden.
  • Posts, it automatically and easily asks you who (which circles) you want your wall posts to be seen by.  In Facebook you have to play around with the post defaults and friend lists and remember to hit the arrow to change things when you don’t want a wall post to be seen by your default group.

Some of the things I don’t like:

  • Not enough people.  Yeah all of my geek friends are on it, but nobody else.  One family member is on it but he is always playing with cutting edge stuff.  So in order to share things online with family and friends, I still have to go onto Facebook since the majority of my non-geek friends are not on G+. I don’t like going to different places to share information (one reason I am rarely on LinkedIn), so I don’t see myself using it until/unless more of my regular friends join.
  • +1 button is confusing, until you know it is just Google’s version of Like.  After that it is just as boring as the Like button.  I would have liked it if you could hit the +1 button and then comment on the item or person’s comment……..


July 22, 2011 Posted by | Librarian Resources | , , , | Leave a comment

   

%d bloggers like this: