Paul Wallace, Senior Advisor & Medical Director, Kaiser PermanenteJoe Gifford, Chief Medical Officer, Regence BCBSJeff Rideout, VP, Internet Business Solutions Group, Chief Medical Officer, CiscoBruce Grant, SVP Digitas HealthTed von Glahn, Director, Performance Information and Consumer Engagement, Pacific Group on Health

Joe argued that, to accelerate the values of Health 2.0, they must be exported to the larger community. (This struck me as a profoundly important point.)

Bruce – There is no franker source of information available to vendors than the Web. Action’s speak louder than words. Listen to hear what people are saying about you. Engage and encourage the community. The power is moving away from corporations and to the user communities in an unprecedented way.

Jeff – How do you take all the innovation and move it to the people, so that we can make health care more effective. Health 2.0 is a significant portion of that solution set.

Ted is disappointed with the lack of robust health care decision support tools on the Web so far. The Health 2.0 community has the opportunity to create data and tools that can facilitate better decision-making, and also to define the standards which are still not solid yet in health care.

Paul noted that Health 2.0 is about personalizing care. We’re finally becoming competent in understanding how to treat disease in the context of the larger situation that the disease resides in, how clinicians can leverage tools to touch as many people as possible in a day and how we can improve outcomes by cultivating trust . The goal is to make the right thing easier to do.

Ben Heywood, CEO, Patients Like MeDoug Hirsch, CEO, Daily StrengthSteve Krein, CEO, OrganizedWisdomKaren Herzog, Founder, Sophia’s GardenJohn de Souza, CEO, MedHelp InternationalBrian Loew, CEO, InspireModerator: Amy Tenderich, Blogger/Journalist DiabetesMine

Sophia’s Garden is a healing community for parents and ailing children, leveraging virtual spaces adorned wtih familiar health management tools.

Daily Strength – A social network of 600 communities serving 100,000 registered users, offering connection with other individuals who also face the same experiences you’re dealing with.

Inspire. Brought into the meeting at the last minute as a result of winning the People’s Choice Award, Inspire is another very well designed site for patients to collaborate.

Patients Like Me.  Simple tools for patients to track relevant treatments, status and outcomes, as well as their experiences, all in communities.

Organized Wisdom uses human reviewers to curate spam-free, clutter-free search results.

MedHelp began in 1994, and has developed a robust catalog of patient and expert generated content on specific conditions, including question-answer exchanges between patients and doctors.

The interesting characteristic of these sites is that technology is used to facilitate a better experience for patients. The tools are aimed at people who may or may not be experienced in using tools.

Brian Loew made a particularly astute statement in talking about how these sites are different than standard social networking sites like Facebook or MySpace: "Health care is different. You don’t typically find people willing to talk about their pancreatic cancer in the middle of Madison Square Gardens."

While patients are already aware of these sites, the mainstream of doctors are just now becoming conscious of their existance. As they do, these sites will become richer resources and available to more and more patients.

Audience Questions:

What do you see as the biggest hurdle for up-and-comeing patient social media sites?Competition from new sites was highest (46%), followed by Health groups/offerings on Google, Yahoo, Facebook and MySpace (32%).

What do you think patinets want most out of thei experience on the web?Quick and easy medical information search (33%), followed by Hear testimony from other experiencing the same illness/condition (31%).

Let’s imagine you were an "ePatient." which of the six sites we’ve seen today would be most appealing to you?Patients LIke Me was first at 39%.

Tom Eng, President & Founder, HealiaVenky Harinarayan, CEO, KosmixAlain Rappaport, CEO, Medstory/MicrosoftDean Stephens, President & COO,Healthline NetworksModerator: Jack Barrette, CEO WeGoHealth (ex-Yahoo

Each of the presenters gave a 4 minute demo of their specialized search abilities: gathering together relevant, multi-media information, and then breaking that information down into discrete sub-topics. A key challenge each approach has dealt with in a different way is helping the searcher weight, narrow and make sense of the findings.

Most have developed advanced algorithms that work better with natural language, and that rank results by probabilities and incidence. By identifying searcher characteristics and responding in kind, these tools increasingiy also allow searchers to be aggregated into social groups.

Questions:

How likely is one of these health vertical search players to take meaningful market share from "the major?""Not Very Likely" came in first at 47%, followed by 32% voting "Pretty Likely."

Which search engine gave the most useful results? Praxeon came in first, but the first four were relatively even. Kosmix received the lowest response.

One of the challenges that specialized search engines face is the development of profile in the consciousnesses of consumers who use them relatively infrequently. They must find ways to exist alongside the majors, who have strong search capabilities but cannot, by definition, be nearly as nuanced.

One questioned called the panelists to task for not accessing the growing (and, presumably, increasing valuable) mass of user-generated health care content.

One response said that this was a work in progress, and would undoubtedly increase over time. But another respondent noted that, at this time, the search engines should rightly be focused on identifying evidence-based information first, with commentary secondary.

Superb discussion on a very challenging and increasingly sophisticated topic!

Will Web 2.0 play in health care?

The people who are of the Health 2.0 population do not overlap with the health care user population…yet.

Health 2.0 gives a voice and leverage to the people who need health care. Tech needs to exist inside the context of relationships, but those may be accelerated as patients, providers and the industry more capably relat to one another.

In 2007-8, we’ll see the shakeout in the health tech industry.

A marvelously succinct and insightful presentation!

Missy Krasner, Product Marketing Manager, GoogleWayne T. Gattinella, CEO, WebMD Health Corp.Peter Neupert, VP Health Solutions Group MicrosoftBonnie Becker, Director, Health Category, Yahoo!    Moderator: Jane Sarasohn-Kahn, THINK-Health

Jane introduced the session, pointing out the 4 panelists firms’ capitalization is somewhere in the neighborhood of a half trillion dollars.

The goal is to first create a highly trusted brand. That’s the predicate to be able to leverage in health care the assets that each of these major firms have accumulated elsewhere.

Defining the business model is one of the problems that must be solved to deliver on the promise of personalized medicine.

How do we make "data liquidity" happen.

People trust themselves to make decisions given a sufficient quantity of trusted information.

People trust well-known, credible organizations as information sources, but they need a coach to sift through the information.

While the panelists have focused primarily on search, the audience wanted to know what else is coming down the pike They panelists responded that search will continue to increase in relevance, but will also drive a lot of the social networking functions.

One audience question asked whether physicians are marginalized by Web-empowered patients. The panelists appear to agree that, in contrast to the early days of Internet-based health information, doctors are increasingly receptive and supportive of that health information. This is part of an ongoing dialectic of the convergence of professional and consumer information and interests.

Esther Dyson (thankfully) asked the panel to describe their business models for Health 2.0.

Missy said that Google does not aspire to be a health care company, but rather extend their reach as a firm that helps people manage information. They use very small project groups. Their goal is always to drive more search, since that’s where they make their money.

Missy commented that "data liquidity" is a great term, but that health care currently has too many standards and that the real goals of data liquidity are at least a couple years away. The other panelists generally agreed. They avoided in-depth discussions of how data might be brought together to create multi-layered patient records and decision support tools for patients, clinicians, vendors and purchasers, and it wasn’t clear whether this was coyness or simply a lack of progress in this direction.

One questioner asked whether "the majors" shouldn’t show the leadership to bring data together and define the standards.

Peter responded that the question is how to bring the source data providers together and use that information to enable decision making for consumers. He believes that technology + information + communication has the promise to impacting behavior.

After a spectacular opening video by Scribe Media on the history and current trends in medicine and health care, Matt and Indu made the introductions. They met and conceived the idea of the Health 2.0 meeting just last December. It’s all come together since then.

This is an international meeting, with representatives from all over the world, and one that has attracted a large of marquis and just emerging sponsors. Not bad, noted Mattthew, for a consultant and a guy who writes a blog while sitting in his pajamas.What the Hell is Health 2.0? – MatthewThe frame for this question is "What the hell is Web 2.0?"

    – Personalized search that finds the right answer for the long tail.

    – Better presentation of integrated data.
   

    – Communities that capture the accumulated knowledge of patients and caregivers; and clinicians

    – Intelligent tools for content delivery.

In health care, transparency and consumerism are important foundations of any effort. In addition, Health 2.0 is a way of linking content with transactions, with more productive results.A Continuum of Health 2.0 – Its Present and PotentialUser generated health care goes toUsers connect to providers, which goes to Partnerships to reform delivery, which goes toData drives discovery.

Finally, Matthew asked the audience who would win the Presidential election.

Hillary Clinton won handily with 35% of the vote.

Good morning. I’m here at the SF Hilton, where the Health 2.0 meeting should begin in about a half hour. Last night I wrote my thoughts on the meeting over at The Doctor Weighs In. Throughout the day I’ll do my best to describe the goings-on here at each session. Matthew and Indu are looking just the slightest bit haggard but genuinely energized, and there’s a wonderful spirit of innovation, comradeship and anticipation in the room. It should be a terrific day. Stay tuned.