Disqus - Latest Comments for jmccabegorman

Re: The healthcare circus happening in Washington

jmccabegorman — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:38:18 -0000

What's really frightening is that the profiteers who run big industries like defense are already salivating at the thought of all the money, all those beautiful contracts, and all their awesome long-term connections with those responsible for signing the checks.

Healthcare will be bought and sold, and that stimulus will mean companies like Perot get another corporate box at some sporting venue to wine and dine all those new clients.

Not exactly the systemic toast to our health I was hoping for...

Re: Faith and Healthcare

jmccabegorman — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 02:34:28 -0000

irb123 -

Great comment. On many hospital admission/pre-admission forms there is actually a space to denote your faith/religious orientation if you so choose.

This is done for a number of reasons, not the least of which may be in case your religio-spiritual orientation ascribes to last rites, the healing of the sick, or other ritualistic processes that may occur in the hospital setting.

In the hospital where I worked as a patient advocate, the chaplain got a list of those who had asked to 1. received a visit and 2. receive the Eucharist, or Communion.

As a sometime patient who received healing rites (both in and out of the hospital) I found this comforting, but certainly did not 'use' the hospital setting for preaching or proselytizing.

As a patient advocate, I did experience patients, or their family members, requesting contact information for various religious persons/services, which we provided from a list.

Personally, my favorite story about faith in the healthcare setting involves a visit to my ortho doc after numerous surgeries. During the visit, we discussed what I was doing to try to accelerate bone growth (reduce caffeine, increase calcium/protein intake, no alcohol intake, etc). After going through the litany (based on journal article research), I asked him if there was anything else I could do. His response: "pray."

That was one of the best prescriptions I ever received...

Re: 98,000 lives lost each year from medical errors in 1999. 98,000 lives lost each year from medical errors in 2009.

jmccabegorman — Wed, 27 May 2009 20:50:35 -0000

Jay -

Something I hardly see rearing its ugly head in the medical error discussion is the inclusion of systemic variance reporting.

One of the biggest challenges here is that US hospitals will hold onto the closed nature of error (and potential error) reporting systems, usually called 'variance tracking,' as long as they can.

Right now, variances are NOT part of the patient's official medical record in the vast majority of 6400 hospitals in the US, for legal reasons.

As a Patient Advocate in an ED, I was responsible for variance reporting, as were all my fellow hospital employees-clinical or nonclinical. Most classes of employees received training on how to do this by using our HIS (I say most because I'm not sure our 'environmental' or 'food services' or 'security' staff ever received this training).

I'd enter variances if a patient was 'forgotten,' for example, or slipped and fell in a hospital restroom, or had a complaint that staff on call at the time were unable to resolve.

An initial problem over and above variances systemically not being transferred to patient's records to protect the hospital (and staff involved!) legally is that we were always given the option to input a variance anonymously.

So, to make this clear - errors in hospitals are VASTLY underreported because we don't have any kind of ability to track national variance reporting by facility, staff member, shift, type of initial complaint/triage Dx, etc.

If a national law were to be passed stating that variances MUST be input into patients' records (either before or after a nationally standardized hospital review process - which is a whole different can of worms in and of itself) then we'd have a lot more relevant information about medical errors by which a national organization could track 'universal' or 'evidence-based' error prevention.

Re: Microsyntax.org: A Messifesto

jmccabegorman — Tue, 26 May 2009 16:58:53 -0000

Hola -

We're using the subtag microsyntax convention (already in practice > 2mos) at @polarwisdom and @organizedwisdom.

Love to help out.

Best -
Jen

Re: Failure’s ROI

jmccabegorman — Tue, 26 May 2009 09:41:40 -0000

Phil -

Amazing post.

First step to being a recovering success-aholic? Remembering what it felt like to dump out Legos, or Play-Doh, and have a glut of substance with which to build.

Note: If you need a reminder of how all that glutinous possibility feels spread in front of you, run, do not walk, to the nearest superstore and pick yourself up some building blocks.

I could give a rat's a$% about whether or not anyone else considers me successful. Don't get me wrong - I use the recruitment-worthy key terms on LinkedIn, my CV, etc., like most of the rest of us. However, this abandon is the reason I sometimes make jumps (especially career-wise) that many have told me I'll regret.

Funny thing about that...I don't regret a single career jump (whether it resulted in flight or fall) failure, or 'bad decision.' They keep me brutally honest with myself about what I want, how I'm feeling, and whether or not my passions (including work) are fulfilling.

But that's also the introvert, loner perspective talking. Problem is, I don't want to succeed, I want to build. I want to connect people, spoke to spoke, like Tinker-Toy hubs spilled out before me.

I want to help construct superstructures that stand up against vigorous toddler-type world-shaking.

That means I need other people. I will absolutely fail without them. You can't 'succeed' at building something like that alone.

And whenever you bring others into the equation, and combine them with self, you've got near equal probabilities of success and failure.

Grieve for failures, but also grieve a bit over 'successes' as measured by others. It means you've made some level of concession in recombining your potential happiness with theirs.

Success, like failure, is shared, redistributed. It has a network effect.

But even this isn't a really tight qualitative analysis of failure's net value, for individuals or groups.

Singular 'failure', much like singular 'success,' only demonstrates ROI if you move beyond that instance after the grieving/celebration process.

The equation?

Life/work/love = success(n)+failure(n), where (n) is undefined.

Now wonder we don't want to go it alone...

Re: How The Health Blogosphere Was Scammed

jmccabegorman — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 21:10:33 -0000

Dr. Val -

Thanks for posting the complete comments/emails from Wellsphere for transparency purposes. I too declined the offer to join, but have blogged in the past for HealthCentral (and enjoyed working with that team).

One of the differences between my receipt of the Wellsphere invite and previous invites to syndicate content was this - I got on Twitter and asked the community of health bloggers there for feedback, before I committed.

What I found influenced my decision not to join. Without this very rapid feedback from fellow tweets I would have been hard-pressed to make an informed decision.

This is unfortunately a classic case of read the fine print. Once bitten, twice shy...

Previous commentors are absolutely right that many online content sites make money by selling ads to sponsors.

However, we might all want to examine what that's worth to us - if it wasn't for the money, what were we expecting from the transaction. We all want to be read - and many of us do this for near-philanthropic sharing purposes.

But let's also be honest - some of us do make professions out of being 'named' and receiving speaker invites, consulting gigs, etc. - these aims are furthered by establishing our online presences.

Let's remember there are many 'transactions' on the web that aren't monetized...we bloggers sometimes give away our content for link-love, more exposure, and higher organic Google search results. The problem here is that many didn't seem to know it and the company involved didn't make it easy to discern the terms of content publication.

Also, this brings to light the need for a clearly stated opt-out policy. It should be far easier to discontinue the relationship and delete your account with no further material being distributed without your permission.

Another suggestion - use a Creative Commons license on your blog. If you sign up with the company to syndicate content and they don't ask you to rescind it you have some support for later battles.

I have a great deal of sympathy for those who's content is now in jeopardy and hope that Wellsphere and HealthCentral are responsive to your concerns!

Re: Tom Daschle Will Be Next Secretary of HHS: What Does This Mean For Healthcare?

jmccabegorman — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 15:07:41 -0000

Dr. Val -

Excellent post and coverage, and insightful metaphors.

Fascinating timing with the analogy as well, being that Disney is building a hospital:
http://www.healthleadersmed...

Re: Do You Do Health 2.0?

jmccabegorman — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 19:50:59 -0000

Eric -

Your point about expanding the description of Health 2.0 consumerism is excellent: we should be "including some sort of active intent with respect to one's health condition."

I don't see many Health 2.0 companies taking an introspective view and examining what their clients actively do/make/buy as a result of using their service or site, in other words, how do they take things learned/accessed online into the offline world of daily life and decision-making?

In order to supply the missing focus on intent, there are a few simple questions we can use as the point of origin for examining future consumerism in eHealth, mHealth ,and Health 2.0, i.e. what do Health 2.0 sites/services help me do? Why do I seek them? What's the end use after access?

Until we can answer the above questions (or actually even begin to examine them), we won't be able to provide beneficial goods and services that have real-world relevance.

Excellent post!

Re: Personal Electronic Health Records: MySpace Or HealthSpace?

jmccabegorman — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 21:02:21 -0000

Mark -

This is an excellent and useful review - thank you!

I'm fascinated in particular by this response:

"60.19% would not want any kind of HealthSpace account. The main reasons being they were “not interested” in seeing their own record, security fears and preference of talking to a health professional rather than something online."

I'd love to know the exact wording of the questions the researchers used to determine these findings...

Re: The most common question about Hello Health

jmccabegorman — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 09:09:12 -0000

Jay - awesome. Clapping.

Re: Top 30 Health Tweeple

jmccabegorman — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 12:28:57 -0000

Mark -

Thanks for compiling this list.

It's great to see so many tweets who connect various sectors of health and medicine in one place, twittering away.

The cross-collaboration (virtual watercooler for entire health stratosphere) is what makes Twitter a highly productive tool for me - it's like a mini-MBA or grad course.

Without doubt, it is *the* primary tool that has augmented my productivity in the past year of use.

It's important to note this isn't just about talk, however - it's also about action: Two initiatives at least have begun on Twitter: Medical Education Evolution (interactions with @Berci and @tedeytan) and Tech Geek Brunch DC (with @tedeytan, @anitasamarth, @ekivemark and other HealthCampDC goers).

I'd pay, in fact, to have access if it comes down to Twitter needing a real-world revenue model.

Where else can you debate things like consumer-centric care and genetics theorems with a worldwide community of interest? And then arrange offline meetups to continue the conversations in the 'real' world?

Looking forward to tweeting more with you.

Re: Invitation: Rethinking the Hospital (colloquium)

jmccabegorman — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 09:39:10 -0000

Maarten-

I'm so sorry I can't be there tomorrow in person to see your thesis presentation.

Some things to remember:

1. You had harder questions at Medicine 2.0!
2. Your hard work is paying off.
3. You can now look at what's next without anything hanging over your head to finish!
4. Your research has been vetted by, literally, a worldwide community of enquiring minds. You are READY!
5. "Ability is a poor man's wealth." - John Wooden, US Baseball Hall of Fame
6. "The real challenge in data fusion is not getting the data but making sense of them." - Simson L. Garfinkel, Scientific American Magazine, September 2008. Plenty of theses slam us with data. Yours makes sense of it all.
7. "You can only write about what bites you." Tom Stoppard, The Observer. Creating value, whether you're building a stage, directing a crew, conducting a Nexthealth meeting, is something that has bitten you my friend. Great to see you producing value in return.

And finally, from Virgil - "To these success gives heart. They can because they think they can."

You can!!!
Hugs from Maryland -
Jen

Re: Putting Back in the World

jmccabegorman — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 21:32:40 -0000

Micah -

Checked out both sites. Awesome. I was looking at Razoo recently and wishing there was something out there more like SocialVibe.

If there's anything I (or Nexthealth.NL) can do, count me in.

Re: Las Vegas Baby

jmccabegorman — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 22:20:20 -0000

Micah - hang in there. One day at a time. This one's almost done; the next is just around the corner.

Re: Random Halo Effects

jmccabegorman — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:04:15 -0000

Carlos -

It is indeed a small, small world, and it was such a pleasure to finally meet you in person.

Here's to many more thought/space bending times together - and see you at Health 2.0!

Jen McCabe Gorman
and Maarten den Braber
Nexthealth

Re: Medicine 2.0

jmccabegorman — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 17:34:13 -0000

Very important scientific and academic work going on here in Toronto, including discovery that toothpaste (used) dropped from a balcony 18 feet up floats in a dispersal pattern rather than drops straight down...:)

Can't wait to meet everyone at Medicine 2.0!

Re: JAY PARKINSON + MD + MPH

jmccabegorman — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 05:47:31 -0000

Err, Mark Leavitt (even better).

Re: JAY PARKINSON + MD + MPH

jmccabegorman — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 05:44:51 -0000

Nevermind, got it...going head to head with Mike Leavitt huh? :)

Re: JAY PARKINSON + MD + MPH

jmccabegorman — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 05:40:46 -0000

Jay - what date/time is your talk?

Re: Thoughts On Choosing Board Members

jmccabegorman — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:39:04 -0000

Got another one:

* Interview BOD members just as thoroughly as you would potential employees.

Why are they interested in serving? What value do they feel they bring to the group, the mission, ops, strategy, etc?

Board members are doing the organization a service, not a favor. They should be able to articulate this before they sign on.

Re: Thoughts On Choosing Board Members

jmccabegorman — Mon, 25 Feb 2008 07:34:26 -0000

Excellent, concise post with clear, valuable advice. BOD recruiting is one of the most difficult 'jobs' for an exec. I'll gift-wrap this article and hand it to execs who invite me to consider board service.

I became a BOD member at 26, and am still the only female Exec Comm member. I wish someone had handed this list to me in an envelope before my first meeting - many of the items are ones unfortunately learned via good (and not so good) experiences with other members.

I wish more boards would put a premium on those who 'do' (show up, participate actively, ask the tough questions, seek out answers) rather than those who 'deign' (big names who show up to 1 meeting a year and then slow discussions as a result of not understanding progress and setbacks, strengths and threats).

Thanks again for the great post.