health services on the net - what's good for me? what's bad? and how do i tell the...
TRANSCRIPT
HEALTH SERVICES ON THE NET –WHAT'S GOOD FOR ME? WHAT'S BAD? AND HOW DO I TELL THE DIFFERENCE?
(Panel session)
15TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON WWW/INTERNET (ICWI)
MANNHEIM, GERMANY
OCT 28, 2016
HTTP://INTERNET-CONF.ORG/
The web only answersKeep in mind: answer quality depends on what you ask.„If you expect wise answers, you have to ask sensible questions“1
1 Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (Link)
1:
But the physician also asksAnd he may ask sensible questions to find a personaliseddifferentiated diagnosis.
1:
The net onlyreactsResults depend on user´s searchskills and health literacy.
IN OTHER WORDS:
The physicianinteractsResults depend on doc´sexperience, sense and sensibility.
...but fail:IN RESPONSE TO “I AM HAVING A HEART ATTACK,” “MY HEAD HURTS,” AND “MY FOOT HURTS.” ONLY SIRI GENERALLY RECOGNIZED THE CONCERN, REFERRED TO EMERGENCY SERVICES, AND IDENTIFIED NEARBY MEDICAL FACILITIES. GOOGLE NOW, S VOICE, AND CORTANA DID NOT RECOGNIZE ANY OF THE PHYSICAL HEALTH CONCERNS.1
1 Miner AS, Milstein A, Schueller S, Hegde R, Mangurian C, Linos E. Smartphone-Based Conversational Agents and Responses to QuestionsAbout Mental Health, Interpersonal Violence, and Physical Health. JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(5):619-625. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.0400 (Link)
1:
A TEAM OF PHYSICIANS ANALYSIED 100 HEALTH ADVISINGWEBSITES ON 24 CRITERIAS (E.G. COMPLETENESS, MEDICALEVIDENCE, FAIR BALANCE OF INFORMATION, INDICATION OFSOURCES).
KEY RESULTS:• MORE THAN 30 % WHERE RATED AS
„POOR“ OR „VERY POOR“• THE AVERAGE SCALE WAS „FAIR“ (4)
Source: Central Krankenversicherungen AG (Editor), Praxis Dr. Internet – Studie zum Kranheitssuchverhalten in Deutschland sowie zur Qualität von Gesundheitsinformationen im Internet (Link)
Scale Website count
1 (Very good) -
2 (Good) 9 websites
3 (Satisfactory) 34 websites
4 (Fair) 24 websites
5 (Poor) 30 websites
6 (Very poor) 3 websites
Even wikipedia is struggelingfor acceptance as a reliablesourceSources: The Guardian, Is Wikipedia a reliable source for medical advice? (Link)Hasty RT et al.. Wikipedia vs Peer-Reviewed Medical Literature for Information About the 10 Most Costly Medical Conditions. J Am Osteopath Assoc 2014;114(5):368-373. doi: 10.7556/jaoa.2014.035. (Link)Mühlhauser I et al., Does WIKIPEDIA provide evidence-based health care information? A content analysis, Z. Evid. Fortbild. Qual. Gesundh. wesen (ZEFQ) doi:10.1016/j.zefq.2008.06.020 (Link)Wikipedia; Reliability of wikipedia (Link)
They can´tprescribe them!!Lack of certifications means: recommending an app is a legal grey area
So they better keep hands off!
3:
The net andthe healthcare sector areparallel universes……WITH A LOT OF MORE OR LESS WEAKCONNECTIONS IN BETWEEN.
CONTRARY TO ALL EXPECTATIONS & STATEDPOTENTIAL, THE NET´S OVERALL CONTRIBUTIONTO HEALTHCARE PROVISION IS STILL LOW.
CONTOVERSIAL CONJECTIVE: