You could be an information spigot

Even if you are not an information altruist, there are those who would like to just plug you in and take it from there.

Hat tip: Ken Mandl

Open Source Software Not So Evil

I recall several earnest conversations with colleagues who insisted that by making all the projects I was involved in (e.g. i2b2 and Indivo) adhere to an Open Source license, I was being both naive and counterproductive. There was no way, I was told (as recently as last year) that "real" companies would get anywhere close to supporting products that had an Open Source license. This story about Microsoft's use of Open Source software in its search engine developments should settle those concerns, at least for the next few days.

More here.

Open access evolution: extinction and new models

In the current maelstrom of competing models for sustainable, affordable, or profitable publishing enterprises, an early pioneer of open access publication recently closed it doors. The Medscape Journal of Medicine (MJM), was a brave experiment, particularly in that the authors were not charged large fees as is done for many of the current open access journals. Most relevant for future scholarship is how the back issues of MJM will be kept readily accessible. Most encouragingly, it seems that copies of MJM will be archived with Pubmed Central which constitutes one of the wiser investments of our tax dollars.

Concurrently, we see the emergence of a new model of peer review from the Journal of Biology (hat tip David Osterbur). In this model, authors whose manuscripts were accepted for review can choose to not have their manuscripts re-reviewed but instead can appeal to the editors for publication without revision. Their appeal may not be accepted (in which case the manuscript is rejected) or it is accepted in which case it is published along with an editorial commentary. Regardless of the merits of this model, it does provide editorial added value to each publication, in contrast to many open and closed access journals.

Can we afford NOT to invest in basic research?

With thanks to Ted Shortliffe who pointed out this article by Bill Buxton. Bill makes an interesting argument in favor of basic research which in many ways runs counter to trends in federal and corporate funding.

Primary care burdened by primary data

This report out of the Physicians' Foundation shows that doctors are dissatisfied, are going to quit in droves and 94% said the time they devote to non-clinical paperwork in the last three years has increased. So why does it seem that so many are still trying to get into medical school? Is there a medical practice reality chasm?

More genetics in high school than medical school?

This highly amusing story about fish that are not what they are said to be, should be a sobering wake-up call to medical schools. Here we read about students using third parties to DNA sequence and then taxonomize samples they procured in restaurants and groceries. In the article we read of high-school students (who are not necessarily interested in careers in science) whose scientific literacy with regard to genetics would put many physicians to shame. Admittedly, these students have privileged access to well-informed thought leaders and yet can we point to equally creative and hands on teaching of genetics (and its commoditization) in our elite medical schools? The gap between the public's knowledge of genetics and that of the "professionals" appears to be continually narrowing even while public expectations of the value of such knowledge continues to grow.

Human and machine readable attribution

Whenever we post information on any electronic network, there are at least two audiences: human beings (typically viewing the information through a web browser) and automated agents (e.g. web crawlers). Until recently those who wished to inforrm these two audiences of any use restrictions or intellectual property had to do so twice: in machine readable form and in human readable form. One of the problems in having two forms is that with time (or even from the start) they may not represent the same restrictions or openness. That can lead to, at the very least, misunderstandings and annoyance. Fortunately, one of the more useful ways of the Semantic Web is how it allows for a flexible combination of representation that allows both audiences to be served in the same expression. Here is a particularly useful and recent example.

A skeptical view of electronic health record benefits

This report from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) was widely reported in the press today. The press has mainly focused on the report's skepticism about earlier estimates of greater than $40 billion/year savings from broad national electronic health record adoption. This certainly is going to remain a point of controversy but other questions raised by the report merit broader debate. Do EHR's reduce duplicate ordering of tests and reduce adverse events in the outpatient setting? It has been my own intuition that it does, but this CBO report points out some contrary evidence. It seems that these questions constitute a useful research agenda for the medical informatics community which should be further pursued, in many healthcare delivery settings.