3 ms·

> If a health company doesn't know your data they can't accurately diagnose trends in your health. The only health companies that diagnose are providers. They

> If a health company doesn't know your data they can't accurately diagnose trends in your health. The only health companies that diagnose are providers. They have been explicitely REJECTING patient-generated data for the longest time because of concerns about poor data. Are your blood-pressure cuff, scale, thermometers, etc. calibrated and regularly tested? Did you take the measures properly? Etc. Now some of that caution is excessive and we're starting to see bridges where patient-generated data is being considered. But by and large, providers don't want crappy data. Even claims data sent to insurance companies are known to be fudged/imprecise/incorrect and aren't relied on for clinical decision. Even for population health that data is bad (some PH vendors still tried to rely on it but that turned out to be a bad idea). So Facebook data has zero value to most providers.

dragonwriter 9y ago
> The only health companies that diagnose are providers. They have been explicitely REJECTING patient-generated data for the longest time because of concerns about poor data. Patient-generated data, both objective and subjective, is frequently relied on by providers for diagnosis (and always has been); where available, provider-collected data is preferred and more heavily weighted in the event of direct contradiction, but providers simply have no practical choice but to rely on patient-generated data. > Even claims data sent to insurance companies are known to be fudged/imprecise/incorrect and aren't relied on for clinical decision. Well, yeah, since the provider making the clinical decision provides that data after the fact, of course they aren't going to rely on it. Even if it was perfectly accurate, they would use their own source data from which data would later be extracted selectively to support claims.
- athenot 9y ago
  Patient-generated data that's been obtained by a clinician interviewing a patient is one thing. I'm referring to patients generating their own data and uploading it into the EHR of their provider. > Well, yeah, since the provider making the clinical decision provides that data after the fact, of course they aren't going to rely on it. That hasn't stopped some population health vendors to try to sell products that use claims data to build PH assessment tools. And yes that works about as well as you'd expect. :)

dragonwriter 9y ago

> The only health companies that diagnose are providers. They have been explicitely REJECTING patient-generated data for the longest time because of concerns about poor data. Patient-generated data, both objective and subjective, is frequently relied on by providers for diagnosis (and always has been); where available, provider-collected data is preferred and more heavily weighted in the event of direct contradiction, but providers simply have no practical choice but to rely on patient-generated data. > Even claims data sent to insurance companies are known to be fudged/imprecise/incorrect and aren't relied on for clinical decision. Well, yeah, since the provider making the clinical decision provides that data after the fact, of course they aren't going to rely on it. Even if it was perfectly accurate, they would use their own source data from which data would later be extracted selectively to support claims.

athenot 9y ago
Patient-generated data that's been obtained by a clinician interviewing a patient is one thing. I'm referring to patients generating their own data and uploading it into the EHR of their provider. > Well, yeah, since the provider making the clinical decision provides that data after the fact, of course they aren't going to rely on it. That hasn't stopped some population health vendors to try to sell products that use claims data to build PH assessment tools. And yes that works about as well as you'd expect. :)