• Save
Ethics 2.0: Implications of Connected Health
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Ethics 2.0: Implications of Connected Health

on

  • 3,650 views

An interactive panel chaired by Dr. Joan Dzenowagis on Ethics 2.0 that utilized an audience response system at Medicine 2.0 in 2009 at Toronto, Canada.

An interactive panel chaired by Dr. Joan Dzenowagis on Ethics 2.0 that utilized an audience response system at Medicine 2.0 in 2009 at Toronto, Canada.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
3,650
Views on SlideShare
3,624
Embed Views
26

Actions

Likes
3
Downloads
0
Comments
3

4 Embeds 26

http://blog.e-healthgr.com 16
http://storify.com 6
http://www.slideshare.net 3
http://learn.vccs.edu 1

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • https://zeo.sgul.ac.uk/students/clubs/societies/Ethics.jpg
  • http://www.economist.com/sciencetechnology/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13899038Explain VW is 2nd life
  • https://journals.tdl.org/jvwr/article/view/621/495

Ethics 2.0: Implications of Connected Health Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Ethics 2.0: Implications of Connected Health
    Joan H. Dzenowagis
    Kevin A. Clauson
    Francisco J. Grajales III
  • 2. Ethics 2.0: Ethics and standards
  • 3. Ethics and standards
    Medicine has long been guided by laws, codes, oaths and prayers
    Lawyers practice under rules of conduct imposed by law, courts, professional societies
    Journalists are guided by laws, professional and employer standards
    Businesses must abide by laws and regulations, but in the market practices vary widely
  • 4. Are these sufficient in the information age?
    Changing scale, pace and pattern of exchange
    Changing relationships and business models
    Interaction, linking multiple data sources
    Trends in information exposure
  • 5. Does the use of social media in health pose special challenges?
    What is "correct and proper" behaviour?
    How do we judge/designate quality and reliability?
    Whom do we trust to define it?
    How do we encourage or enforce it?
  • 6. Objective
    To explore ethical expectations of people using social media in health
  • 7. Ethics 2.0…your views
  • 8. Audience response system
    • Responses are anonymous
    • 9. Benefits to the 2.0 community: results will help identify issues, serve as a basis for discussion and may be further disseminated (e.g., publication)
    • 10. Benefits to you: clarify and share ideas
    • 11. If you do not wish to participate in this poll, simply refrain from using a clicker
    • 12. Please answer all questions. If you are unfamiliar with a topic please select “I don’t know”
  • What is your primary designation?
    MD
    Nurse/midwife
    Student/trainee
    Business/industry
    Journalist/blogger
    IT specialist
    Library scientist
    Patient/patient advocate
    Academician/researcher
    Other
  • 13. On an average day, how many hours do you spend on the web (including mWeb)?
    <1
    1-4
    5-8
    9-11
    ≥12
  • 14. Which of these 2.0 services have you used?
    Social networking
    Microblogging
    Video sharing
    Blogs
    Wikis
    Forums/Listservs
    Photo sharing
    Other
    None
  • 15. In which of these 2.0 services have you contributed content?
    Social networking
    Microblogging
    Video sharing
    Blogs
    Wikis
    Forums/Listservs
    Photo sharing
    Other
    None
  • 16. Publicly available personal health data
  • 17. Who is the owner of the personal health data that an individual posts on a 2.0 site?
    Site owner
    Company who pays for the data
    The individual
    The individual gives up any rights when they share their data
    I don’t know
  • 18. When using social media, privacy is violated when data are viewed or used by…
    Site owners
    A marketer who pays for the data
    Any third party not in Terms of Use
    No violation, as info is freely given
    I don’t know
  • 19. In terms of data protection in Web 2.0…
    Paid/subscr. services guard data better than free serv.
    Privacy depends on business model
    Protection is impossible
    Benefits of a service are worth the risk
    I don’t know
  • 20. HCP co-consults via 2.0 tools are acceptable if..
    access is restricted to known community
    (1) and patient names are not disclosed
    platform providers can keep data private
    permitted by hospital/HCP assoc guidelines
    Never acceptable
    I don’t know
  • 21. HCP should keep their personal and professional web identities separate…
    Always
    Depends on their ability to manage it
    No, it is not possible
    Never – not ethical
    I don’t know
  • 22. Personal and professional web identity standards should be managed through…
    International codes of ethics
    Specialty/professional codes
    Legislation
    Institutional policy or boards
    It is up to the professional
    I don’t know
  • 23. Regarding internet and health, who has the primary responsibility to protect consumers?
    Int. organizations
    National governments
    Service providers
    Law enforcement
    Users
    I don’t know
  • 24. Health information quality is not a societal concern; it is "user beware"
    True
    False
    I don't know
  • 25. How many legal agreements is an unregistered YouTube user subject to?
    None
    1-3
    4-5
    >6
    It doesn't matter
    I don't know
  • 26. YouTube’s Legally Binding Agreements
  • 27.
  • 28. Ethics 2.0…from a Healthcare Provider’s Perspective
    Ethics 2.0…from a Provider’s Perspective
  • 29. Evolving from Provider-Patient to Provider-ePatient Relationship
    Valid (bona fide) relationship used to necessitate in-person consultations
    Telemedicine, PHRs, and Medicine 2.0 are changing perceptions
    Innovative practitioners & patients are driving change
    Evolving from Provider-Patient to Provider-ePatient Relationship
    • Valid (bona fide) relationship used to necessitate in-person consultations
    • 30. Telemedicine, PHRs, and Medicine 2.0 are changing perceptions
    • 31. Combination of innovative practitioners & empowered patients are driving change
  • Duty to Warn: Anytime a healthcare professional is obligated to provide information and/or take action due to situational knowledge they possess
  • 32. Examples of Duty to Warn
    Patient tells psychotherapist/social worker he plans to kill his girlfriend (Tarasoff)
    Patient’s immediate blood relative diagnosed and treated for genetically transmissible condition
    Pharmacist receives two prescriptions from same physician treating different problems that have dangerous interaction
  • 33. Pharmacist-Patient Relationship
    Forerunner of participatory medicine
    Is a voluntary act “upon which a trusting relationship is grounded”
    Process is patient initiated
    Ethical responsibility in pharmacy practice. 2002.
  • 34. Which is MOST likely to establish legal pharmacist-patient relationship & duty to warn?
    Pharmacist contribution to entry on drug in Wikipedia
    Pharmacist posts on a social networking site
    Discussion of drug therapy on a pharmacist’s blog
    A series of podcasts voiced by one pharmacist
  • 35. Legal Duty to Warn versus Ethical Obligation for Medical Advice
  • 36. “Virtual Samaritans” are ethically responsible for the medical advice they provide online if they are:
    a patient.
    a registered clinician.
    either a patient or a registered clinician.
    It is solely the responsibility of the Web 2.0 provider.
    None of the above
    I don’t know
  • 37. Ethics 2.0…from a Researcher’s Perspective
  • 38. Virtual Informed Consent
  • 39. Does This Avatar Make Me Look Fat?
    Study conducted in Second Life (SL)
    Members of “facility’s Survey Group” were recruited
    Interviewers and subjects were avatars
    JVW Research 2009;2(2)
  • 40. What was the method used to obtain informed consent in the SL obesity study?
    No informed consent (IC) ethics board, or IRB involvement was described
    An object was created in SL that included a written IC form for participants
    Interviewers used chat to inform participants
    Subjects viewed a video detailing IC
  • 41. What is the most ethically sound method to obtain IC in a virtual world?
    Create interactive video panel to review IC
    Create immersive model to mimic study conditions
    Review IC with subject via text chat
    Review IC with subject via voice chat
    Give subject an object with written IC to review
  • 42. Virtual informed consent (IC) is:
    no different than offline IC in regards to rights and responsibilities for both subject and researcher.
    different from offline IC because researchers may not be able to monitor subjects to same extent.
    different from offline IC for rights and responsibilities of both subject and researcher.
    I don’t know
  • 43. Questions?
  • 44. Contact
    Dr. Joan Dzenowagis | dzenowagisj@who.int
    Dr. Kevin Clauson | clauson@nova.edu
    Francisco Grajales | me@franciscograjales.com