Kim Painter writes more on medical blogs, and focuses on the privacy issue. (via David Rothman)
Related posts:
- LA Times on medical blogs
- The Detroit Free Press on medical blogs
- NPR on doctor blogs
- Medical wikis
- Medical blogs 101
- AMNews writes on medical blogs
- Is Mark Lanier commenting on medical blogs?
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 2 comments }
As a physician, we spend years learning to distill a clinical situation down to a succinct “story” that can be re-told when needed at rounds, at case conference, at tumor board, or in the clinical record. We seek to relay the “truth” as we can best discern it.
I am a new blogger and I clearly identify myself in my postings. I find it difficult to turn the stories into works of fiction. Since the “truth” is contained in the story, I am more likely to de-identify patients by leaving out identifying information rather than altering it. The real meaning might be contained in the subtle sub-texts, and since each reader takes away what he or she can find in the stories, I risk changing the lesson by altering what happened.
I’ve been wondering how much alteration in a story is sufficient to comply with HIPAA. Where is the line between fact and fiction that is appropriate for general consumption? Is it enough to leave out name, date, location – or should one also change gender, disease state? Bruce is right that if the story is altered too much the lesson may be compromised. How do other bloggers find the right balance? Any guidelines/rules?
Comments on this entry are closed.