<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Some Doctors Trying to Silence Patient Feedback with Waivers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://company.changehealthcare.com/blog/some-doctors-trying-to-silence-patient-feedback-with-waivers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://company.changehealthcare.com/blog/some-doctors-trying-to-silence-patient-feedback-with-waivers/</link>
	<description>Daily information on healthcare and how you can better manage healthcare costs.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:39:32 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Christopher</title>
		<link>http://company.changehealthcare.com/blog/some-doctors-trying-to-silence-patient-feedback-with-waivers/comment-page-1/#comment-663</link>
		<dc:creator>Christopher</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:19:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://company.changehealthcare.com/?p=658#comment-663</guid>
		<description>Bill - We are definitely in agreement that with enough comments by a community of users combined with mechanisms for users AND providers to participate in the conversation and easily mark comments as either &#039;helpful&#039;, &#039;not helpful&#039;, or &#039;flag as inappropriate&#039; - the value of aforementioned tools are simply that: one of many decision-points that patients and consumers use to vet Providers that they want to establish a doctor/patient relationship with. 

Quite frankly, transparency in healthcare is still in the Wild Wild West phase. But I also believe that there are some basic tenets that when adhered to, help to create constructive feedback for all patients and their providers:

1. No comment can be anonymous. Users must register and maintain some semblance of identity.  I&#039;m NOT saying that the person&#039;s full name, address, picture, and astrological sign is known (just a touch of sarcastic humor there), just that there is some reasonable identity behind comments made by individuals. Yes - there are circumstances where anonymity does cause MORE comments to be made, but often (not always) the value of increased comments is offset by inappropriate or non-helpful comments.  I suggest, no hiding behind anonymity.

2. Look at the TREND of comment themes, not a single (or handful) comment that is either highly positive or negative.  Please do not make a decision on a Provider based solely on a single comment. However, if there are 10+ positive comments or comments voicing concern... then that points you toward a reasonable impression of that Provider&#039;s bedside manner or patient experience. 

3. Enable EASY mechanisms that let the public/users &#039;police&#039; commentary.  There are multitudes of case studies that validate the premise that a user community can and will elevate helpful/useful conversations and also the same community of users will &#039;bury&#039; [aka flag as non-helpful or inappropriate] extremist, hyper-off-the-mark, over-the-top commentary.  As long as the tools are in place and easy to use, then the community can/will leverage them.  


It may be naive, but I trust our community of Users (which includes BOTH patients and Providers). One of our main goals over the coming month is to ensure that each user (again, both patient&#039;s AND Providers) are effortlessly made aware WHEN and WHAT conversation is occurring about THEIR Providers, Rx, and health issues (or in a Provider&#039;s case - commentary from patients) and enable that person to join the conversation and easily add their experience or viewpoint, if they so choose to.

Honestly, we don&#039;t have THE silver bullet of &#039;fair and balanced&#039; but we are making strides to constantly listen to our community of Users and Providers to try and find a reasonable  yet very transparent means to help people make informed decisions about finding new Providers and conveying one&#039;s current experience (both the good and bad) with existing Providers.

Any other constructive thoughts or advice is appreciated as we navigate this new land.

christopher</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bill &#8211; We are definitely in agreement that with enough comments by a community of users combined with mechanisms for users AND providers to participate in the conversation and easily mark comments as either &#8216;helpful&#8217;, &#8216;not helpful&#8217;, or &#8216;flag as inappropriate&#8217; &#8211; the value of aforementioned tools are simply that: one of many decision-points that patients and consumers use to vet Providers that they want to establish a doctor/patient relationship with. </p>
<p>Quite frankly, transparency in healthcare is still in the Wild Wild West phase. But I also believe that there are some basic tenets that when adhered to, help to create constructive feedback for all patients and their providers:</p>
<p>1. No comment can be anonymous. Users must register and maintain some semblance of identity.  I&#8217;m NOT saying that the person&#8217;s full name, address, picture, and astrological sign is known (just a touch of sarcastic humor there), just that there is some reasonable identity behind comments made by individuals. Yes &#8211; there are circumstances where anonymity does cause MORE comments to be made, but often (not always) the value of increased comments is offset by inappropriate or non-helpful comments.  I suggest, no hiding behind anonymity.</p>
<p>2. Look at the TREND of comment themes, not a single (or handful) comment that is either highly positive or negative.  Please do not make a decision on a Provider based solely on a single comment. However, if there are 10+ positive comments or comments voicing concern&#8230; then that points you toward a reasonable impression of that Provider&#8217;s bedside manner or patient experience. </p>
<p>3. Enable EASY mechanisms that let the public/users &#8216;police&#8217; commentary.  There are multitudes of case studies that validate the premise that a user community can and will elevate helpful/useful conversations and also the same community of users will &#8216;bury&#8217; [aka flag as non-helpful or inappropriate] extremist, hyper-off-the-mark, over-the-top commentary.  As long as the tools are in place and easy to use, then the community can/will leverage them.  </p>
<p>It may be naive, but I trust our community of Users (which includes BOTH patients and Providers). One of our main goals over the coming month is to ensure that each user (again, both patient&#8217;s AND Providers) are effortlessly made aware WHEN and WHAT conversation is occurring about THEIR Providers, Rx, and health issues (or in a Provider&#8217;s case &#8211; commentary from patients) and enable that person to join the conversation and easily add their experience or viewpoint, if they so choose to.</p>
<p>Honestly, we don&#8217;t have THE silver bullet of &#8216;fair and balanced&#8217; but we are making strides to constantly listen to our community of Users and Providers to try and find a reasonable  yet very transparent means to help people make informed decisions about finding new Providers and conveying one&#8217;s current experience (both the good and bad) with existing Providers.</p>
<p>Any other constructive thoughts or advice is appreciated as we navigate this new land.</p>
<p>christopher</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Wells</title>
		<link>http://company.changehealthcare.com/blog/some-doctors-trying-to-silence-patient-feedback-with-waivers/comment-page-1/#comment-660</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Wells</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 00:53:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://company.changehealthcare.com/?p=658#comment-660</guid>
		<description>And how does Mr. Parks propose that ratings sites &quot;filter out comments that are libelous&quot;?

To do so would require investigation into the veracity of claims and at the very least suggest tacit validity to everything published at the ratings site.

I disagree with your assertion. It&#039;s up to the consumers you advocate representing to investigate their healthcare provider, whether by rating site, word-of-mouth, or actual experience.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And how does Mr. Parks propose that ratings sites &#8220;filter out comments that are libelous&#8221;?</p>
<p>To do so would require investigation into the veracity of claims and at the very least suggest tacit validity to everything published at the ratings site.</p>
<p>I disagree with your assertion. It&#8217;s up to the consumers you advocate representing to investigate their healthcare provider, whether by rating site, word-of-mouth, or actual experience.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Subhankar Ray</title>
		<link>http://company.changehealthcare.com/blog/some-doctors-trying-to-silence-patient-feedback-with-waivers/comment-page-1/#comment-657</link>
		<dc:creator>Subhankar Ray</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2009 16:36:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://company.changehealthcare.com/?p=658#comment-657</guid>
		<description>This will be good for excellent doctors not trying to please anybody but the patient.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This will be good for excellent doctors not trying to please anybody but the patient.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
