RxInformatics.com

The verdict is in. The quality of health information in Wikipedia is inadequate as a sole source for pharmacists [1], medical students [2], dentists [3], and patients [4]. However, it is good enough for use by nursing students [5]…well, sort of.

Determinations about adequacy are based on studies which evaluated the freely editable, online encyclopedia based on characteristics such as reliability, scope, and accuracy. A clear consensus has emerged from that body of literature collectively rendering a decision that Wikipedia is not a suitable resource for high level consultation or citation. The use (and citation in particular) of Wikipedia by healthcare students and professionals seems to irk practitioners and educators moreso when there are high quality alternatives, suggesting the perception that citing Wikipedia in those cases simply reflects a lack of awareness and laziness. To be fair, Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has been unwavering in his stance that no encyclopedia should be used as a reference source for college level work or above.

Healthcare in general and pharmacy in particular, is still finding its way with social media. One of the least developed elements of Health 2.0 remains the legal aspect. A few years ago several of us starting discussing scenarios in which a legally valid pharmacist-patient relationship might be created based exclusively on Web 2.0 mediated interactions. This discussion has been aided, of course, by social media. Also, as part of an interactive panel at Medicine 2.0 a couple years ago we posed this question (attendees’ responses here).

This discussion has recently been formalized as a Commentary published along with Matthew Seamon PharmD, JD and Brent Fox, PharmD, PhD (@Brent_Fox) in the American Journal of Health System Pharmacy. An accompanying podcast has also been produced for it by AJHP. Ideally the article and podcast help promote dialogue and encourage the profession to think proactively on the subject.

@kevinclauson

I posted this on my site since the emphasis there is 'consumer health informatics and university life', but wasn't sure if this presentation was closely enough tied to informatics to go here. I ended up deciding since it dealt with integrating technology to improve educational delivery that is was relevant.

I recently gave a presentation at the Nova Southeastern University 21^st Annual Contemporary Pharmacy Issues program. The slide deck for the presentation can be viewed below.

@kevinclauson

There has been a lot of interest in the meaningful use debate surrounding electronic medical records (EMRs) of late, but I read a post by @TedEytan that got me thinking about a different kind of 'meaningful use'. The topic of his post was the differences between mHealth and eHealth, but what really caught my eye was the coined term "Internet's Informant General" (to describe @SusannahFox of Pew Internet). I had not come across the term before and I found it very striking. I have recently been working on a project involving panels of key informants representing their respective countries and the idea of this combined with a 'representative virtual office' like Internet Informant General was oddly compelling for some reason....much more than another in a line of czars (little 'c'). The fact that this office was faux filled by someone on the strength of their research (and ability to communicate/disseminate it) made it even more interesting as an idea.

Last year I developed a course titled “Consumer Health Informatics & Web 2.0 in Healthcare”.  It was an excellent learning experience for me and hopefully beneficial for the students as well.  The course was offered last semester in our College of Osteopathic Medicine – Biomedical Informatics Program.  I plan to offer a similar course next semester in our College of Pharmacy tailored for those students and capitalizing on the lessons learned from the previous version.

Pharmacy is a profession in healthcare.  Pharmacy informatics is a specialty within this profession. It is not yet one of the recognized specialty areas by the Board of Pharmaceutical Specialties, but it is a specialty nonetheless.  Consumer health informatics is a subspecialty within informatics, and can be integrated with pharmacy or any other profession in healthcare.  My path has led to immersion in the possibilities associated with consumer health informatics.

Consumer health informatics (CHI), like medical informatics, health informatics, and pharmacy informatics, suffers from a bit of an identity crisis – or at least a lack of consensus terminology.  The two working definitions for CHI that I am particular to are:

“…analyses consumers' needs for information; studies and implements methods of making information accessible to consumers; and models and integrates consumers' preferences into medical information systems.”

British Medical Journal article by Eysenbach

"…studies from a patient/consumer perspective the use of electronic information and communication to improve medical outcomes and the health care decision-making process."