Medical blogs are featured in the LA Times. This blog, along with GruntDoc, Dr. RW and OB/Gyn Kenobi were linked and mentioned.
The piece talks about Grand Rounds, and re-iterates the familiar concerns about patient privacy and product endorsement.
As the medical blogosphere, or “new media medicine” (thanks, Dr. A), continues to grow, there will be controversy on how to deal with these issues. The strength of blogging is the ability to reveal the day to day lives of the medical profession, and this transparency can be controversial.
I’m sure once our medical leaders catches on to the blogging phenomenon (give them a few years), there will be some guidance. But until then, blogs will continue to push the envelope and garner (sometimes negative) media attention in the process.
Two questions need to be resolved. Should physician blogs be held to a higher standard, especially when compared to blogs in other fields like politics or the law? Should conflicts of interest be disclosed, akin to a medical journal?
I think the answer to the first question is yes, especially when it is concerns patient privacy.
The second question is less clear. Blogs are not meant to replace nor compete with those of medical journals. Content is nor peer-reviewed, nor are they free of bias. In fact, many blog entries are written with a defined slant. It is clear that blogs play a markedly different role from medical journals, and I don’t think they should be bound by the same restrictions.
Related posts:
- NPR on doctor blogs
- The Detroit Free Press on medical blogs
- Should physician blogs be held to a higher standard?
- Medical blogs in the USA Today
- A medblogger tones down
- Medical bloggers are held to a double standard
- Demise of the medical blogosphere?
Scrubs
{ 4 comments }
I recently ran into this topic head on in a very personal way. Although I am not quite ready to jump into the fray regarding details of my what I hope will be only a “near-blogastrophe”, I think this is one of the most important issues facing medical bloggers today. We are building the foundations for this media for years to come with every post we write. All journalists have standards that their field has developed over time through trial and error and this media form is no different. We are right now setting the standards. What will they be?
I think that the public deserves to know that true identity of the physician blogger and also whether there is any conflict of interest with regard to the facts or views being broadcast. Why should a physician not meet professional ethical standards just because the communication with any patient is on the internet than in the office? Taking time and attention to think out a non-identifying scenario, based on a real case, to provide an example case for discussion is possible with true anonymity to the real patient. In addition, I agree, medical bloggers should also follow establish ethical standard set out for other professionals in the news media.
I have no conflict of interest in writing what I just wrote except for my interest in ethics and medical professionalism. ..Maurice.
Considering the overt political campaigning and PC BS that passes for ‘peer reviewed’ medical literature in the best journals of the day (Lancet, NEJB, JAMA) bloggers aren’t much worse off – and much faster to publication.
The difference? People expect that bloggers will deliver crap.
Excellent synopsis of the problem, Kevin. As you know, I have also been weighing my commitment to transparency against the risk of exposure. I do not claim to have solved the problem. The presence of this dialogue, on your blog and others, is an important first step.
Comments on this entry are closed.