The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation (NSF) stopped processing grants, some government websites were made inaccessible and many important research programmes were left hanging, potentially putting lives at risk in the case of some disease studies. Use of government telephones and e-mail was also suspended. The restrictions were still in place as Nature went to press.
At the NIH, headquartered in Bethesda, Maryland, 73% of the agency’s 18,646 employees were immediately placed on furlough, or enforced leave. The agency also stopped accepting patients for its clinical trials or initiating new studies. Minimal staff remain to care for lab animals and to protect NIH facilities.
I realized how much of the services of the US government I actually use regularly when visiting the PubMed and Clinicaltrial.gov webpages that both aren’t updated anymore. Luckily clinical trials on run at NIH can still be continued. But the halt in both, new trial initiation and NSF research and grant processing, will have a long-term impact.
See on www.nature.com
ESO has just launched ePatCare:
ePatCare for ESO is an innovative and interactive platform for viewing, creating, sharing and presenting patient cases.
Visit the ESO ePatCare store to view the ePatCare for ESO patient case library.
Simply select the cases that interest you and save them to your own personal ePatCare Cloud – you can now view your cases whenever you wish!
Navigate cases either chronologically or one department at a time by taking a virtual tour. Just choose your preferred view.
Creating cases is intuitive and sharing with your colleagues is simple.You can also edit your cases, adding more information as your patient’s treatment progresses.
e-ESO, the electronic European School of Oncology, now offers an ePatCare plattform for its participants. This tool was developed by Boehringer Ingelheim and launched in 2012. It offers an easy and intuitive way to present patient cases for education (like at e-ESO) and discussion. Unfortunately there is no description of any implemented social tool (not even a comment function?) to fasciliate discussion of cases, which would enable some kind of virtual tumor board meetings.
See on www.e-eso.net
It’s not the first time I say Google Glass can be the biggest hit in medical technology this yeas, and now as the number of good examples is still rising, it’s becoming more and more evident. Here are a few cases and experiments.
Rafael Grossmann, MD, FACS had a pilot project with this team about the use of Google Glass in medical education. Here is his summary:
Lucien Engelen and his team at REshape created a video that shows what a regular patient-doctor interaction would look like with the Google Glass and what additional features it could add to the process:
Some people are scared of Google Glasses, others disguise technologies like these, and still others are fascinated by the possibilities those glasses could bring, and play around to explore the chances and limitations. It is impressing what is going on, whether the glasses will ever find really useful applications or not. Here are some examples of what people try to do. Find more by googling.
See on scienceroll.com
The World Congress on Gastrointestinal Cancer by ESMO just started yesterday. So far, tweeting is still small, but may increase in the next hours, hopefully leading to interesting discussions as at ASCO. You can follow the meeting using the hashtag #WorldGI. To see what was linked to on Twitter so far, check the link below.
[View “World Congress on Gastrointestinal Cancer just started” on Storify]
Vitals raises $22 million to add staff, health insurance decision-support tools to doctor appointment and ratings website to satisfy consumer demand for healthcare price transparency
Vitals currently serves as a doctors review website and soon will help patients in the US to get through their health insurance journal.
I took the opportunity to check some of the doctors I visited myself in the US for their reviews in Vitalis. To make it short: If you get good reviews, you’r off great, with many stars blinking into the potential patients eyes. But if there is only one or two patients who weren’t happy with you, it looks bad, as the dominating star rating immediately downgrades you.
So how to handle such rating systems that they stay objective? What about just showing star rating after a doctor got e.g. 10 written reviews? What about fine tuning, e.g. separating organizational issues (waiting times) from medical issues?
Doctors rating will come more and more in Europe too, so maybe it’s time to think about a system more elaborate than Amazon-like stars.
See on medcitynews.com
Today we discuss the dissemination of research results, clinical trials, and other oncology news using social media, as well as what type of media oncologists use, how useful and relevant this type of information is for most oncologists, and where oncologists can plug into information and communication sources.
We speak with Michael A. Thompson, MD, PhD, who was the medical director of cancer research at ProHealth Care Regional Cancer Center, in Wisconsin, and clinical trials lead investigator of the NCI Community Cancer Centers Program. Dr. Thompson has a blog over on ASCO Connection, a professional networking site for communication within the worldwide oncology community, and he is active on Twitter. You can find his tweets at the Twitter handle, which is the same as a username, @mtmdphd.
A very insightful interview with one of the leading onoclogists on Twitter and other social networks. Read it to understand what’s evolving on social media for oncologists and how to get into it.
See on member.ubmmedica.com