Health 2.0: Difference between revisions

Several criticisms have been raised about the use of Web 2.0 in health care. Firstly, [[Google]] has limitations as a [[Diagnosis|diagnostic tool]] for [[Physician|Medical Doctors]] (MDs), as it may be effective only for conditions with unique symptoms and signs that can easily be used as search term.<ref name="TanNg" /> Studies of its accuracy have returned varying results, and this remains in dispute.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Amri|first=Montassar|last2=Feroz|first2=Kaliyadan|date=2014-01-01|title=Google searches help with diagnosis in dermatology|journal=Informatics in Primary Care|volume=21|issue=2|pages=70–72|doi=10.14236/jhi.v21i2.52|issn=1475-9985|pmid=24841406}}</ref> Secondly, long-held concerns exist about the effects of patients obtaining information online, such as the idea that patients may delay seeking medical advice<ref>Ojalvo, H. E. (1996). Online advice: Good medicine or cyber-quackery? Retrieved September 22, 2007 from http://www.acponline.org/journals/news/dec96/cybrquak.htm</ref> or accidentally reveal private medical data.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Fernandez-Luque|first=Luis|last2=Elahi|first2=Najeed|last3=Grajales|first3=Francisco J.|date=2009-01-01|title=An analysis of personal medical information disclosed in YouTube videos created by patients with multiple sclerosis|url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=An+analysis+of+personal+medical+information+disclosed+in+YouTube+videos+created+by+patients+with+multiple+sclerosis|journal=Studies in Health Technology and Informatics|volume=150|pages=292–296|issn=0926-9630|pmid=19745316}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Lo|first=Bernard|last2=Parham|first2=Lindsay|date=2010-01-01|title=The impact of web 2.0 on the doctor-patient relationship|journal=The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics: A Journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics|volume=38|issue=1|pages=17–26|doi=10.1111/j.1748-720X.2010.00462.x|issn=1748-720X|pmid=20446980}}</ref> Finally, concerns exist about the quality of [[user-generated content]] leading to misinformation,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Stellefson|first=Michael|last2=Chaney|first2=Beth|last3=Ochipa|first3=Kathleen|last4=Chaney|first4=Don|last5=Haider|first5=Zeerak|last6=Hanik|first6=Bruce|last7=Chavarria|first7=Enmanuel|last8=Bernhardt|first8=Jay M.|date=2014-05-01|title=YouTube as a source of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patient education: a social media content analysis|journal=Chronic Respiratory Disease|volume=11|issue=2|pages=61–71|doi=10.1177/1479972314525058|issn=1479-9731|pmc=4152620|pmid=24659212}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Syed-Abdul|first=Shabbir|last2=Fernandez-Luque|first2=Luis|last3=Jian|first3=Wen-Shan|last4=Li|first4=Yu-Chuan|last5=Crain|first5=Steven|last6=Hsu|first6=Min-Huei|last7=Wang|first7=Yao-Chin|last8=Khandregzen|first8=Dorjsuren|last9=Chuluunbaatar|first9=Enkhzaya|date=2013-01-01|title=Misleading health-related information promoted through video-based social media: anorexia on YouTube|url=http://www.jmir.org/article/view/2237/1|journal=Journal of medicalMedical Internet researchResearch|volume=15|issue=2|pages=e30|doi=10.2196/jmir.2237}}</ref> such as perpetuating the discredited claim that the [[MMR vaccine]] may [[MMR vaccine controversy|cause autism]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Venkatraman|first=Anand|last2=Garg|first2=Neetika|last3=Kumar|first3=Nilay|date=2015-03-17|title=Greater freedom of speech on Web 2.0 correlates with dominance of views linking vaccines to autism|journal=Vaccine|volume=33|issue=12|pages=1422–1425|doi=10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.01.078|issn=1873-2518|pmid=25665960}}</ref> In contrast, a 2004 study of a British epilepsy online [[support group]] suggested that only 6% of information was factually wrong.<ref name=":0" /> In a 2007 [[Pew Research Center]] survey of Americans, only 3% reported that online advice had caused them serious harm, while nearly one-third reported that they or their acquaintances had been helped by online health advice.<ref name=":0">Economist, The. 2007. Health 2.0 : Technology and society: Is the outbreak of cancer videos, bulimia blogs and other forms of "user generated" medical information a healthy trend? The Economist, September 6: 73-74</ref>