Monday, May 12, 2008

Questioning Open Source Motives: Can a Corporation be Virtuous?

An interesting article about open source appeared last week in the ZDNet blog post: Open source as the villain in its own story.

I posted a comment, referencing our resent disucssions and recieved this challenging response:

“What does it disrupt? What "potential benefits to humanity" could it
possibly have (disrupt) while it is "minimizing (disrupting) risk to
shareholders", whose sole motive is making money (according to present
Corporate business models)?”
My reply follows:

All excellent questions, especially since you know neither my company nor
me, and since we live in a society in which capitalism has become “perversely
commercial” and “pathologically mutated” (see http://curinghealthcare.blogspot.com/2008/02/us-healthcares-perverse-commercial.html).

It’s no wonder many of us believe virtue is absent from all corporate business models, and that greed and ego are people’s prime motivators.

In our case, however, we’ve been struggling to survive for the past 15 years because we follow a business model whose mission is focused on helping make our world a better place by improving the health and wellbeing of all by bringing greater value to the healthcare consumer through better use of better knowledge.

Unfortunately, our insistence to remain true to this virtuous business model has, in fact, hurt revenue. That’s because our healthcare system is not built to bring value to consumers; it’s actually quite the opposite (see http://curinghealthcare.blogspot.com/2007/10/think-small-and-dont-rock-boat.html).

A primary reason we’re considering open source is that we believe achieving our mission can best be served by opening up our software worldwide through licenses that sacrifice big profits for the potential benefits of collaboration with international communities of consumers, clinicians, developers, and researchers.

One way we envision our technology helping poor nations is by providing an exceptionally cost-efficient architecture for sharing healthcare information. Instead of requiring continual connectivity to the Internet, high bandwidth communications, and expensive software systems with centralized data storage, all our disruptive technology needs is occasional e-mail over low bandwidth connections and a spreadsheet. For many regions of the world, our low cost, low resource consumption, peer-to-peer solution makes very good sense.

Bottom line: Making money it essential to any corporation (or else you’re out of business), but it need not be the sole mission of a company. True, with the way capitalism in our country has devolved over the years, it’s not easy at all to be a virtuous corporation; in fact, it can be very difficult, at least that’s been our experience. But I’d rather “go down with the ship” than to profit financially by sacrificing our ideals.

Saturday, May 10, 2008

An Open Source Proposal

In this post, I discuss the things we are considering as we develop an open source proposal. Our decision process is more complex than most other OS companies since we have put over two decades of work building an architecture and wide range of diverse applications that incorporate a patented disruptive technology. I welcome your feedback.

In order to clarify our current mind-set, I've included a brief description of our existing source code modules, data library modules, and spreadsheet models that comprise our software applications. I also describe the basic components of our asynchronous, publisher-subscriber, node-to-node architecture.

Source Code Modules

All code modules in our applications are written in currently Excel Visual Basic for Applications (VBA), and some also include Visual Basic (VB) routines. These macro modules, along with Excel Active-X user forms, can be converted to .Net without great difficulty (if desired). Following are the functions these modules provide.

Data Source Access

  • SQL queries
  • XML parsing
  • X12 parsing
  • HTML parsing
  • Other document parsing
  • Data transformation
  • Consumption of database-generated reports
  • Retrieval of documents via hyperlinks
  • Access to web sites.

Node-Based Workflow Functionality

Overview: As described below, our nodes use the CP Split™ technology to separate content from presentation in spreadsheet models. By first sending a report-template file to a subscriber, the data can then be sent in a delimited text file (or an SMS text message, etc.) independent of formulas and graphics. Even greater value is obtained when using a series of nodes to ship data from one person to the next, with each person contributing and using what they can.

The nodes use macro-driven spreadsheet template files. These templates execute specific publisher and subscriber node functions based on the particular models being used for data access/input, processing, delivery, and presentation (reporting). Following describes the basic functionality of the nodes' spreadsheet template models.

Basic Publisher Node Functionality

The Publisher Node Template Files (Pub TF):

  • Create Content Files, which contain the content (data and information) elements used to generate reports. These files are unique in that they include information conveying the location of each element within predefined formations (patterns) in a spreadsheet used to generate reports (the "destination spreadsheet"). The Publisher Node's Template File (Pub TF) creates these Content Files by first obtaining, transforming, validating, integrating, and analyzing content elements from all required sources. It then conveys the location of the content in the destination spreadsheet by adding metadata or by arranging the content elements in a particular manner.
  • Transmit Subscriber Node Template Files (Sub TF), which are described below, to authorized Subscriber Nodes. This is done for new Subscriber Nodes, and when a Sub TF is modified. In addition, Publisher Nodes transmit the Content Files corresponding to each Sub TF, whenever new content or modified is added. This file transmission process is currently done automatically via macros by sending encrypted e-mail attachments through MS Outlook.
  • Generate Pub TFs and Sub TFs: Components of a wizard guiding development of template files currently exist.
Basic Subscriber Node Functionality
The Subscriber Node Template Files (Sub TFs):
  • Consume the Content Files sent from Publisher Nodes by extracting them from the e-mail attachments they receive
  • Present interactive, asynchronous, desktop reports, defined by models in the Sub TF, through a Viewer, which applies formatting instruction to the data and information extracted from one or more Content Files.

    Rules/Algorithms

    The Pub TFs and Sub TFs contain rules (algorithms) that execute logic and computational processes. They are used in conjunction with spreadsheet formulas to provide decision support, alerts, warnings, role-based views, etc.

    APIs

    Enables connectivity with other applications.

      Data Library & Content Modules

      These modules contain no programming code.

      Master Data Index

      • Hierarchical evergreen list of assessment items defining data entered manually and obtained from other sources
      • Uses a Dewey Decimal type Indexing system
      • Included branching logic to speed manual data entry.

      Instructional/education materials

      • Original text
      • Links to web-based materials
      • Incorporation of third party materials.

      Types of Content

      • Health risk appraisals
      • Signs and symptomology (physiological & psychological)
      • Life problem assessment
      • Emotional health & psychological wellbeing
      • Treatment-specific information
      • Wellness information
      • Mind-body connection
      • Demographics and personal history
      • Problem management guide
      • Decision support and educational materials.

      Spreadsheet Models

      Personal Health Profiler™ Application (the PROFILER)

      The PROFILER contains spreadsheet models consisting of data sets and rules/algorithms that are used to:

      • Associate signs/symptoms with medication side-effects and adverse drug interactions
      • Support sick-care diagnosis and treatment decision
      • Support well-care health appraisal and intervention decisions
      • Assess treatment progress and outcomes
      • Assess deviations from evidence-based protocols
      • Present role-based views for:
        • Consumers
        • Providers/Clinicians
      Other Spreadsheet Models

      Every application has its own spreadsheet model. The next section briefly describes our other applications in healthcare and other industries.

      Applications Currently Available

      We currently have both healthcare and non-healthcare products and prototypes as described below.

      Healthcare Applications

      The PROFILER

      The Personal Health Profiler comes in different versions, which are tailored to the needs of all:

      • Consumers
      • Providers
      • Researchers.
      Other Healthcare Applications
      • CarePathWays Plus™ (CPW+™)—A clinical pathways application that self-adjusts to diagnostic criteria and provides sophisticated outcomes and variance analyses to drive continuous quality improvement
      • CCR+™—A continuity of care record with advanced decision-support for information sharing and care coordination between primary care physicians and specialists working with the same patient
      • Care Order Management System™ (COMS™)—Facilitates the establishment, delivery and evaluation of plans-of-care in the trauma center and manages facility resources (including staff, beds, equipment and materials) to help assure patients' receive the care they need
      • LifeChart™ tracks and displays concisely, on a pictorial timeline, the relationship between treatments delivered (medications and procedures), patient health status trends (changes in physical and mental health), and influential life events/stressors
      • Personalized treatment guidelines/plans based on assessment/diagnostic data
      • Care management & advocacy system for helping discharged patients with chronic & severe mental illness receive the services and benefits for which they are entitled.

      Non-Healthcare Applications

      Include diverse software for education, oil exploration, financial services, space exploration, wholesale/retail.

      Our Proposed Offer to the OS Community

      Being there are multiple applications, code modules, content modules and template models, we are considering a stepwise process in which we start by making the basic/core components open source under a suitable OS license (yet to be determined). Then, depending on the response of the OS community, I would consider expanding our offering. Here's what I would like to provide initially, which, of course, may change based on the feedback we receive:

      • Since one of our top goals is to offer an exceptionally cost-efficient way to exchange health information in both poor nations that lack a robust communication architecture, as well as more built-up countries, we would offer the source code for our node-to-node (i.e., application-to-application) architecture, which includes our underlying CP Split™ technology patent and e-mail based file sharing.
      • Since the clinician version of the PROFILER is more closely related to the OS work being done on EMR/EHRs, we would offer its source code under the same OS license we chose for the Nodes.

      Our Request of the OS Community

      Source Code Development

      I believe there would be real benefit in collaborating to expand and improve the source code of the PROFILER and Node-to-Node architecture. This includes:

      • Browser-enabling all functionality
      • Improving and expanding the Excel Visual Basic code for asynchronous desktop use
      • Establishing connectivity with all EMR/EHR and PHR databases.

      Content Modification and Development

      • Translate the content modules into other languages
      • Create new content, and modify existing content, through collaboration with:
        • Consumers/Patients
        • Academicians/Universities
        • Clinicians of all types
        • Research scientist.

      Models Development

      Share, use, evaluate and continually improve the spreadsheet template models.

      ---

      In my next post, I examine the question: Open Source Motives: Can a Corporation be Virtuous?

      Thursday, May 08, 2008

      Open Source Considerations: Continued

      Below is a compilation of the helpful comments I've received from readers of this blog in response to my recent post on Open Source, along with some comments and questions.

      Patent-Based Dual-Licensing Open Source Business Model [PDF available here]

      I found this model intriguing since the inventors/licensors of patented software would "…distribute to the public, under open source licenses, software that embodies our patented inventions, and we will seek to encourage those who improve our software to do the same. [They] will encourage the creation and distribution by others of free and open source software that embodies our patents without fear that [they] will sue them for patent infringement. And at the same time, [they] will implement a licensing model that allows inventors and authors, and the universities and research institutions that sponsor them, to profit when their patented inventions and copyrighted works are used in commercial and proprietary products and activities."

      While it allows for "… (1) the making, use, sale, offer for sale, importation, licensing or distribution of open source software; [and] (2) the making or use of software or hardware for experimentation, research or teaching … Companies and individuals are free to modify their open source software in private to develop new applications, but once they put that patented software into production, they must seek a patent license from [the licensor]." In addition, it "… excludes proprietary software and hardware embodiments of [the] patents."

      I read this to mean that when licensees want to sell any application they've developed that incorporates the patented invention, they must pay the licensor "...reasonable royalties based upon the value-add of [the] patented technology." Also, any derived work must be distributed to the public as open source software.

      Several readers commented that I go with a dual license containing a GPL for the OS community and a commercial/business-like license for a fee because it offers the benefits of community support and transparency, which helps develop more reliable products (e.g., through bug tracking), continuous quality improvement, more coordinated development, more satisfied customers through ongoing feedback. The down side is lower profit since revenue is limited to fees generated as a service provider, royalties for the value add, and a smaller market of potential customers since members of the OS community have the rights to sell into the same market.

      Another potential downside is that GPL users can charge the licensor a fee for any patches they develop that improves the code. A suggestion is to put the code of the commercial and open licenses in different modules, which are loaded at runtime and thus unavailable to the GPL user. Commercial users that have access to the source code, on the other hand, would be required to submit patches with authorization for the licensor to distribute under commercial license.

      Still another downside of GPL dual-licensing is it discourages the distribution of code since developers don't get some of the profit when others sell it under commercial license. That's why it was recommended that a very permissive BSD license be used in the portions of the code to which the licensor may want to add proprietary extenstions.

      I'm not sure I have this all correct?

      "Freemium" Business Model [link]

      While not an open source (OS) model, per se, the Freemium model, the basic product is given away for free, and upgrade features are sold to consumers as "premium offerings." I suppose this is similar to the "loss leader" model. This is a good way to stimulate viral marketing (work of mouth) and it can work for a software company as long as the consumers are willing to pay for the upgrades and are not content with only the free version.

      BeeKeeper Model [link]

      This combines an open source project and a proprietary software vendor in a Professional Open Source Software (POSS) model. "POSS companies exist as an exchange system between two sets of consumers: an open source community (motivated by mutual contribution) and a mainstream market (motivated by economic rewards). Organizations in need of support, services, training etc contribute financially for those services as paying customers. That money is used by the POSS company to pay for full-time resources (engineers, product managers etc.) whose efforts … end up as open source software, freely available to an open source community. The open source community contributes to the software by helping improve the design, functionality, quality, translations, and documentation of the software. The improved software attracts more customers and the cycle continues, hopefully perpetually. In this model, all three parties gain:

      • The community gains open source software they can use for their own purposes. This software has more functionality and more resources than a 'pure' open source project could provide. In this way the community profits directly from the POSS company and its customers.
      • The customers gain higher quality software at a better price. The customers profit from the open source community's ability to produce high quality software.
      • The POSS company gains by growing and increasing its valuation as a result of keeping both sets of consumers content."

      An interesting model, but I'm not clear about the constraints on the OS community's rights to sell derived works.

      Conclusion and Next Steps

      There are many ways to go. At this point, I'm most interested in the Dual-Licensing Open Source option, and utilizing some aspects of the Freemium model (since they appear compatible). I'm not clear as to the best way to handle the intricacies when it comes to the OS part of the dual licensing, however.

      See this link for an Open Source proposal we're opening for discussion.

      Monday, May 05, 2008

      Open Source Considerations

      As we continue to prepare the Personal Health Profiler™ (PHP) system for public review (estimated release date is mid to late May), we are examining the benefits and risks of open source licensing to small software companies like mine. In this post, I'm going to present what we've learned and questions we have about open source licensing in order to elicit feedback (comments, ideas, suggestions) from our readers.

      What is Open Source Licensing?

      First, for those who don't know, let me define what the term "open source" software licensing means. It is, in essence, a variety of licensing schemes in which the owners of copyrighted or patented software let others use and distribute the software under the terms of a particular license. There are many different open source licenses, which vary widely in what is free and in what others may or may not do with the software.

      Dan Bricklin (inventor of the first electronic spreadsheet, Visicalc) describes it this way:

      In pretty much all cases of open source, the user of the software gets access to the source code [i.e., the underlying instructions] used to create the software. Differences are in what the user can do with that source. In many cases they can make modifications to the software and use the software so modified. In some cases they can distribute the changes, in other cases they can only let the original owner know of the changes to be possibly added to the next release. In some cases the users can distribute the software (with or without changes) as they please, in others they can only distribute it under certain conditions, such as without fee and with public access to the modified source.

      Some of the desirable 'freedoms' for the software from the user's viewpoint include:

      • The freedom to run the program for any purpose
      • The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs
      • The freedom to redistribute copies
      • The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public.

      Some of the restrictions that people put in their software licenses include:

      • Requirements to maintain the attribution to the original author(s) along with the software
      • Restrictions on the type of license that may cover redistribution
      • Restrictions on the type of licenses that may cover other software included with the software when redistributed
      • Restrictions on the uses of the software, such as non-commercial only.

      There are many arguments about the reasons why various combinations of rights and restrictions should be in a given license. While one may argue about which are "better" for society as a whole or for the company in particular, there is a choice to be made and creators of new software can make them as they please. [Reference]

      Some of the least restrictive licenses seem to be promoted by the Open Source Initiative (OSI). The licenses OSI approves allows anyone, for any purpose, to freely modify and redistribute the software in its original or modified (called "derived") form. Other open source licenses have restrictions. For example, while the Creative Commons Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 license grants licensees the right to freely share (copy, distribute and transmit the software) and remix it (make modification to adapt it for their particular needs), it has the following requirements:

      • Licensees must attribute the software (also called the "work") in the manner specified by the licensor, such as stating the licensor's name and contact information
      • The work may not be used for commercial purposes (the licensee cannot sell or otherwise use the software to make a profit)
      • Anyone who alters, transforms, or builds upon the work must use the same or similar license as the current one if they with to distribute the resulting work to others.

      The licensor may, however, give permission for these conditions to be waived.

      Note that there are dozens of other open source licenses, including those that restricting derived work and free sharing. Very complex indeed!

      What are the Risks of Open Source to an Inventor?

      With all this complexity, why would a software inventor want to license an application as open source? After all, there's considerable risk in doing so.

      Being the inventor of the PHP system and head of a company, due diligence requires that I consider how we would survive if we give away our invention for free after spending tens of thousands of hours of development effort on top other substantial costs (i.e., two decades of overhead, legal fees, etc.). Wouldn't it be business suicide to (a) reveal our trade secrets to potential competitors who have much deeper pockets than we do, (b) give them the right to use our patented processes and copyrighted materials for free, and (c) allow them to make a profit from our work without any compensation to us?

      Well, some of these issues can be mitigated by using a license such as the Creative Commons Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0. But even if other software vendors are prevented from stealing and profiting from the inventor's ideas, open source does not necessarily mean the inventor or his/her company will be fully protected and will gain financially from using open source licensing. So, do the benefits of open source outweigh the risks?

      What are the Benefits of Open Source?

      Despite the risks to the software inventor, I like open source licensing for a number of reasons. For one, it has the potential to reach and engage a large body of collaborators who can create a community who donate their time and expertise to expand and improve the original software system--and do it, ideally, for the common good. This is very important to us for several reasons:

      • Since the PHP system has been built from the "bottom up," it is designed to evolve continually by incorporating and integrating an unlimited diversity of data & information, analytics, and decision tools to help fill the knowledge void in a way that improves worldwide health by addressing the specific health needs of people across all cultures and nations. But being a small company with a discontinuous/disruptive innovation, and lacking the means (the money, work force and other resources) to organize people around the world for such international projects, means we need a cost-effective way to collaborate with other software developers and subject matter experts (clinicians, researchers, educators, translators, etc.) around the globe. Joining forces with international groups of collaborators across all healthcare disciplines (including all forms of physical, mental and mind-body illness, wellness/prevention, Eastern and Western approaches, and alternative medicines) would:
        • Enable the PHP system to realize its potential to provide a wealth of valid, reliable information that promotes the development, sharing, and use of vital health-related knowledge tailored to the people's specific needs throughout the world.
        • Reduce development costs, optimize usability, promote region/culture-specific customization and enhancements, and increase product security and reliability.

      • An open source approach also promises to move us toward accomplishing our company's core mission: To promote better health and wellbeing worldwide--including addressing the needs of the poor in all nations--thorough better use of better knowledge. We believe our technologies enable us to achieve this mission because it offers a cost-effective way to bring together loosely connected networks of people who share information, models and knowledge via a peer-to-peer (node-to-node) communication architecture. Because our technology consumes minimal resources, there is no need for expensive broadband, high-power computers, or costly software architecture. In fact, all that's needed in most situations are low-bandwidth (e.g., slow dial-up) e-mail and a desktop (or web-enabled) spreadsheet application. The e-mail and spreadsheet software handle the automated collection, exchange, integration, analysis and presentation of huge amounts of cross-disciplinary health information. In addition, they provide comprehensive decision-support tools enabling consumers and their sick-care & well-care professionals to make better, more reliable diagnostic and treatment decisions. Where money is tight and conservation of resources is important, costly/complex solutions aren't viable, but our solution is.

      One way open source licensing would enable us to offer our technologies to help people in underserved regions is by affiliating with non-profit organizations such as Open Health Tools, Partners in Health and Nyaya Health.

      Additionally, open sources benefits end-users (consumers/patients, healthcare practitioners, hospitals, wellness coaches, researchers, etc.) by avoiding vendor lock-in, lowering costs, and delivering more reliable products through code that has been peer-reviewed and improved.

      Is Embracing Open Source a Way to Realize Our Vision?

      The potential of open source for improving worldwide health, therefore, is enormous! Yet despite all the benefits, reality dictates that a software company must make money to survive. It's tough enough trying to introduce discontinuous/disruptive technology because it threatens the status quo, requires a paradigm-shift in people's way of thinking, and calls for expensive "missionary marketing" (in which market demand is created when no one knows you exist). The brute reality is that I've been struggling for the past 18 years—at great personal expense and family sacrifice—to have our innovation widely recognized as a useful tool for improving healthcare value (higher quality at lower cost). This has not been due to any defect in our technology, but rather to the reluctance of institutional investors to back the long-term development and marketing of radical innovations. Take, for example, this quote from one investor group: "We applaud your motivation and intentions to create a comprehensive system that would certainly be helpful to society and provide a well needed 'solution' to our healthcare system. However, the business plan … may be far too ambitious, and the…risk…exceeds our comfort level."

      So, while we've been making steady progress for the past two decades, we have not come close to realizing our grand vision of helping make the world a better place by improving the health and wellbeing of all peoples because we've lacked the considerable resources needed to turn such a vision into reality.

      The question now is: How can open source licensing enable us to survive financially, so we can continue on our noble mission through international collaboration?

      One thought is to sell consultancy services to other software developers, e.g., by offering workshops, courses and training sessions to those who want to learn how to develop and improve PHP-based applications. Another is to sell the PHP system to commercial clients under non-open source licenses (including low-cost software as a service models), along with our libraries of assessment questions. In addition, we would offer our patented CP Split™ technology (which describes a unique way to distribute information using a spatial syntax* data structure) under an open source license as a component of the PHP system only, and we would license it for a small fee for development of any other applications.

      Well, that's about it for now. I welcome any feedback about open source risks and opportunities, as well as specific suggestions as to a path forward.

      Part 2

      ---

      * Warning – This footnote is very technical. The term "spatial syntax" is a shift from the traditional paradigm based on (a) tabular/tuple data organization models used by relational databases and (b) markup tag definitions used by XML documents. Instead, it uses predefined data arrays stored in delimited text or spreadsheet files, which are then rendered using templates that apply formatting instructions based on the data locations/positions (e.g., referencing the data by their cell locations in a spreadsheet). This "spatially-based" paradigm is a proven disruptive technology. What makes it proprietary is that it uses a method for spatial addressing in which a rendering template, which contains formatting instructions: (a) consumes a data file whose contents have been arranged in such a way that the template "knows" the spatial positioning of each element in the data file, and then (b) applies the associated formatting instructions based on the data locations.

      There are multiple ways to generate a data file that enables an associated rendering template to use spatial addressing to apply formatting instructions to the data elements. Thus, this method goes beyond mere spatial addressing, and on to establishing associations between such a "report-ready" data file and its corresponding rendering template(s).

      [Note: To leave a comment, please make sure cookies are enabled.]

      Tuesday, April 22, 2008

      Personal Health Profiler™: Part 3

      An article last week in ZDNet Healthcare, titled “Creating personal health record value from the bottom up”, focused on my recent posts about our Personal Health Profiler™ (PHP) system. It describes the PHP as a spreadsheet-based system in which “data is nested so you can drill into the detail. Links and databases can be added automatically so that when someone clicks on a condition the data says they have, they get real advice on what to do. … The goal [is] to link personal data to actionable information so you become a better-informed health consumer.” That’s true.

      The article then goes on to say that a major difference between the PHP system and current day personal health records (PHRs) is that we build the PHP “from the bottom-up, rather than the top-down” and, historically, “…top-down solutions usually get built-out first, because there’s motivation to build them. And bottom-up solutions challenge them later.” While one could argue that the PHP came first (since its development began over two decades ago), this notion of a top-down/bottom-distinction caught my attention.

      Top-Down / Bottom-Up

      According to Wikipedia: “Top-down and bottom-up are strategies of information processing and knowledge ordering, mostly involving software … A top-down approach is essentially breaking down a system to gain insight into its compositional sub-systems…[that are] then refined in yet greater detail…until the entire specification is reduced to base elements. … A bottom-up approach is essentially piecing together systems to give rise to grander systems. … In a bottom-up approach the individual base elements of the system are first specified in great detail. These elements are then linked together to form larger subsystems, which then in turn are linked, sometimes in many levels, until a complete top-level system is formed. This strategy often resembles a ‘seed’ model, whereby the beginnings are small but eventually grow in complexity and completeness.”

      Based on these definitions, a top-down approach to PHR development focuses on defining the main components of the overall system and then defining the smaller parts needed to make it work. A convenient way to do this is by examining existing top-down PHRs (and even electronic medical records) to determine what data are typically collected, what user interfaces are typically used, what types of reports are typically generated, what technology standards are typically followed, etc. Differentiating one PHR from another can be done by making modifications to certain parts. The result is that all top-down PHRs closely resemble each other and evolve gradually over time through series of relatively minor changes. In other words, they are “continuous” (“non-disruptive”) technologies offering small incremental improvements to the status quo.

      A bottom-up approach to PHR development, in contrast, is a process focusing on defining the fine details first, and then building up from those details to create the complete system. For me, the bottom-up process went something like this:

      • The first thing we did was to research, define, organize (categorize), and compile lists of data likely to be necessary for understanding understanding the whole person fully. I reasoned this would be an ongoing process since these lists would have to evolve considerably over time as health science generated new knowledge and healthcare professionals across all healthcare disciplines provided their input. That is, before architecting the PHP’s technology, I wanted to be sure that whatever the technology would ultimately be, it must be able to:
        • Collect every possible piece of information that could help gain deeper knowledge and understanding of how a person’s mind (psychology), body (physiology), and environment (both social and physical surroundings) interact and affect one’s physical and mental/emotional health and wellbeing. The biggest challenge here, by the way, was in the defining the information required for comprehending a person’s psychosocial and mind-body functioning, since understanding a person’s thoughts, emotions, behaviors, social interactions, and environmental influences--and how this all relates to one’s biology and physical health--requires a great deal more information than focusing solely on understanding a particular medical condition.

        • Enable people to gain and use this knowledge and understanding to help prevent and treat biomedical, psychological, and mind-body problems.

      • As these lists evolved, we began determining how best to present this information, through interactive reports, in ways that increase awareness and understanding, and help support decisions. We reasoned that there would have to be a wide variety of reports, each focused on the knowledge needs and decision needs of people with different roles and responsibilities. That’s because the knowledge needs of people trying to understand and receive support for dealing with an existing health problem or personal life crisis differ significantly from what different healthcare professional needs. In other words, there are big differences in the information needed by a consumer interested in self-help for a stressful life event, a person who is working with a wellness coach for help managing a chronic condition through lifestyle change, a patient looking for guidance in deciding on the best treatment option for a medical problem, a primary care physician trying to coordinate a patient’s care, a medical specialist (e.g., cardiologist or oncologist) treating a particular physical condition, a mental health professional treating a behavioral problem, etc. Thus, the reports generated by the PHP system would have to come in a wide variety of types that would have to evolve considerably over time.
      • As the reports were being defined, we began developing technical software processes for collecting, storing and distributing the information in a secure and cost-effective manner, and for generating the reports described above.

      One thing this bottom-up approach taught me early on is that the data collected, reports generated, and technical methods used must be able to evolve continually as health knowledge grows, new technologies emerge, and standards change. That meant the PHP had to be a very flexible and adaptive system.

      Furthermore, since I began this process in 1981, there was no Internet, the first personal computers were just coming to market, and it was decades before the ideas of a PHR was even being discussed in the healthcare industry. That meant we had to discover an original way to build the PHP system. It also meant that we had to find a very cost-efficient way to operate the system since, back then, computer memory, speed and data storage capacity were tiny compared to today.

      Having been intrigued by spreadsheet’s power, efficiency, ease-of-use, and “plasticity” (like molding clay into different forms), we began building the PHP using spreadsheets in unique ways.

      Disruptive Innovation

      I've referred to the PHP system as a “discontinuous/disruptive” innovation, This means it uses a radically different technological approach to developing personal health records, compared to existing dominant technologies or status quo products in a market. Unfortunately, disruptive innovations often go unnoticed, or they are ignored for many years. When they are finally recognized, businesses with a stake in maintaining conventional technologies tend to see them as threats and try to lock them out of the market. In fact, my idea of using spreadsheets as the foundation of a PHR application has been ridiculed and dismissed by conventional software developers in the past. This could be because they don’t realize how spreadsheets can be used in novel ways, they are fearful they might lose business to a simpler and less expensive technology, they don’t want to learn a new of developing software, or for other such reasons.

      Nevertheless, I’ve persisted … and here’s why …

      Why Spreadsheets?

      There are many huge advantages to using the spreadsheet for PHRs and other health information technologies, as long as you know how to handle the challenges. Spreadsheets, after all, have been around for decades, making them one of most sound and solid software ever created. They are efficient, low-cost, easy-to-use, and infinitely flexible (i.e., they can be molded into unlimited types of applications). In addition, spreadsheets have powerful data collection and sharing, computation, model-building, reporting, and automation capabilities. In other words, they offer a quick and easy way to obtain, organize, synthesize, analyze, evaluate, distribute, and display information.

      On the down side, spreadsheets must be examined and controlled in order to prevent errors and unauthorized changes. The PHP does all this in innovative ways.

      One thing most people fail to realize is that a spreadsheet is much more than just a big electronic grid with charts. The truth is, a spreadsheet application has three major components:

      • One component is its electronic user forms that enable a person to input information manually, displaying it, and update it.

      • A second component is its code modules (“macros”), which automate processes for such things as:
        • Obtaining data from databases (i.e., running “queries”) and sending data to databases

        • Extracting data from data streams (transmitted packets of data), from XML documents, and from other text-based files using custom “parsing” modules

        • Performing computations

        • Formatting (“rendering”) information for presentation

        • Transmitting information over the Internet (e.g., using encrypted e-mail attachments)

        • Connecting to other software applications

        • and more.

      • The third component is its sheets (grids) of interconnected spreadsheet cells that work in conjunction with the code (macro) modules. A spreadsheet cell is an electronic “container” that stores, uses and displays numbers, text (up to 10 pages worth), pictures, hyperlinks (to documents and the web sites), mathematical and logical formulas, and more. In addition, the contents of any cells can be copied, shared, moved, sorted and filtered, hidden or displayed, and formatted in many different ways (e.g., the color, type and size of the text and numbers in a cell can be set, as can the color and style of a cell’s interior and borders).

      These cells and code modules make spreadsheets excellent vehicles for developing robust health information applications from the bottom up, as I describe next.

      Examples of how the PHP uses Spreadsheets in Novel Ways

      To exemplify what I’ve just written about spreadsheets, following are four groups of screen shots showing how the PHP system uses spreadsheet forms, grids and modules in innovative ways that deliver a unique range of capabilities and benefits. They explain these processes:

      1. Data definition and collection
      2. Data organization and analysis
      3. Information storage and sharing
      4. Report generation.

      1. First comes data definition and collection. As I said earlier, when I started developing the PHP system, my goal was to create a software application able to manage every piece of relevant information over people’s lifetimes. This information would have the potential to help consumers/patients and their healthcare professionals develop a full and deep understanding of the person’s strengths, weaknesses, risks, problems, health trends (changes over time) and preferences, as well as the suitable options for prevention and treatment. I also wanted the information to be “self-actionable” by providing instruction, insight & guidance and warnings & alerts, which would promote a better quality of life by motivating and enabling the person to help him/herself deal with physical, emotional and behavioral concerns.

      To accomplish this monumental task, I spent many years researching the healthcare literature and examining health questionnaires. During this process, I built “evergreen” (continually evolving) spreadsheet grids containing lists of questions to be answered by a consumer/patient, as well as by healthcare professionals. The PHP system was then designed to manage people’s answers to these questions, along with data obtained from databases, web sites, data streams and electronic documents (including XML files). Figure 1 (below) shows a small section of one of the PHP’s Question Grids.

      This bottom-up path led to the invention of my patented CP Split™ technology and other “discontinuous/disruptive” innovations, which became key components of the PHP system.


      Figure 1 (click to enlarge)

      Referring to Figure 1:

      • Column A contains a unique ID number for each question.

      • Columns B, D and E are used to control the branching logic (when the response to one question determines the subsequent question to be presented).

      • Column C is a symbol that identifies the response scale to use (e.g., Yes-No, Yes-No-Uncertain, select one item from a list, select multiple items from a list, use a 1-9 scale, enter unstructured text, etc.)

      • Column F contains the text for each question.

      • Starting in column G and going to the right are the items a person may select in response to the question.
      For example, on row 180, the symbol in column C designates a 9-point scale, with “NOT AT ALL” on one end (as indicated in column G) and “A GREAT DEAL” on one end (as indicated in column H). The “BRL” in column B, the number 4 in column E, and the ID number in column D, all instruct the software to branch (jump to) question “103 01 20 10” if the person response is less than 4 (on the 1-9 scale). Note that some of the cells are colored, which gives developers a visual depiction of the types of content in those cells.



      Figure 2 (below) shows a series of screen shot depicting a type of user form the PHP system uses for manual data input. Macros automate the process by which the forms read the Question Grid above and present the questions and response options to the person; they also collect and store the person’s responses.



      Figure 2 (click to enlarge)



      As with all the PHP system components, this patented data collection process is very flexible:

      • New questions are added by simply inserting them as new rows into the Question Grid

      • Questions are modified by typing the changes into the Question Grid (and adjusting the ID number accordingly)

      • Questions are removed by deleting their corresponding rows from the Question Grid.

      Note that entirely new Question Grids can be constructed at any time in the same manner. In fact, entire libraries of Question Grids can be developed for use by people with different roles and in different situations.

      In any case, as the questions are answered, the PHP automatically stores person’s responses in a list containing the question ID (in a cell of column A) and the person’s response next to it (in column B)—which comprise the “raw data” —as shown in Figure 3 (below). Note that data not manually entered (e.g., data queried from databases, extracted from documents, or streamed from medical devices) can be added automatically to the manually input data using custom macros.



      Figure 3 (click to enlarge)

      2. Next comes data organization and analysis. Once the raw data are collected, the PHP uses another spreadsheet grid—the Publisher Spreadsheet Grid shown in Figure 4 (below)—whose cells contain an assortment of formulas (which are not visible in the screen shot). A portion of the Publisher Spreadsheet Grid is which, along with its macros, automatically transform the raw data into structured information ready for report writing. Most of the rules (algorithms) for analyzing the data are included in this spreadsheet and others to which it is linked. These rules may contain criteria identifying when certain data indicate the existence of a health problem (e.g., when a lab test is abnormal, when someone’s emotional or state or cognitions reflects a serious psychological concern, when a reported symptom may be due to an adverse medication side-effect, etc.).

      Since this involves technical spreadsheet model-building, I’m not going to take the time to explain what exactly is in this spreadsheet. Suffice to say that the data in this publisher spreadsheet are organized and calculated in a predefined manner that corresponds to the PHP reports.


      Figure 4 (click to enlarge)

      3. Then the contents of the Publisher Spreadsheet Grid are stored and shared. The contents of the Publisher Spreadsheet Grid are now stored in another file, without any macros, formulas or formats. A section of the stored grid, which is called a “Content File,” is shown in Figure 5 (below). The Content File (which can be converted easily to a delimited text file) is encrypted to protect the data inside. It can retrieved at any time the data needs to be updated, and whenever the person wants to view their information. And if they want, people can share any portions of of their Content File with individuals they authorize.

      Note that the Content File can be saved in any location the person wants and its security is compliant with HIPPA regulations. This addresses a concern raised in a recent NY Times article, titled “Warning on Storage of Health Records”. The article discusses how the benefits of personal health records stored in Web-based databases is offset by concerns about risk to privacy. One way to diminish this risk is by putting health records directly in hands of the individual to whom they belong; that way individuals have complete control over who (if anyone) gets to see their personal information. The PHP Content Files enable such protection.



      Figure 5 (click to enlarge)

      4. Now comes report generation. Figure 6 (below) portrays a piece of the PHP report, which I discussed in my initial post on the topic. Only this time I’m showing columns B through F, which are hidden in the actual report.


      Figure 6 (click to enlarge)

      The cells in these columns contain numeric data that have been extracted from the PHP Content File (described above). Other cells use these data to determine what rows should be visible and how the data should be displayed. For example, the series of blue boxes in cells K352 and K380, which indicate the amount of distress the person experiences in two situations, are created by a formula in those cells that use data in column E to determine the number of boxes to display.
      A few other things about using spreadsheets for the PHP reports:

      • In addition to numbers, text and symbols, a PHP report can contain multiple images (including pictures and charts).

      • A report can contain buttons and links that automatically retrieve and display external information from the Web, as well as from electronic documents stored in a person’s own computer or in other computers via networks.

      • Changing a report is similar to modifying the Questions Spreadsheet Grid: Add rows, delete rows, and change the words, formulas and formats of any cells in any rows. A wide variety of charts (graphs) can also be easily added and removed.

      Web-Enabling the PHP System

      The PHP system was originally built as a stand-alone desktop application. We are now in the process of making in web-enabled as well, so anyone with a browser and Internet connection can use it. I will have more to say about this in future posts.

      Fertilizing the Seed

      The quote from the ZDNet article at the beginning of this post included the statement that the bottom-up strategy often resembles a “seed” model in which an application’s small beginning eventually grows in complexity and completeness. This requires that the “seed” be nourished (fertilized). The PHP system is designed to grow and evolve continually through a collaborative process in which consumers/patients, sick-care and well-care professionals, research scientists, educators, software developers and others provide ideas and content that are incorporated into the system. Because it is built with highly efficient and flexible spreadsheets, uses a library of categorized data definitions (similar to a book libraries Dewey Decimal system), has a modular structure, and can interoperate with most (all?) other software system, the PHP is able to molded and expanded into ever-more-powerful knowledge tools that are tailored to the needs of just about anyone. And best of all, this can be done for little cost and with little hassle, which is an important consideration in today’s difficult economic climate.

      My hope is that these posts will help motivate people from all groups to join our team of collaborators and grow the seed we’ve been nourishing into a complete, diversified personal health knowledge system that has a positive impact on the health and wellbeing of all people.

      In my next post, I discuss the strategy of open source software licensing as a means for imprive health worldwide.

      Tuesday, April 15, 2008

      Personal Health Profiler™: Part 2

      In my last post, I introduced our Personal Health Profiler™ (PHP) software application, the first personal health knowledge system giving self-help (problem-solving) guidance and decision-support. I discussed how the PHP offers a model of where personal health records (PHRs) ought to be heading.

      Before I delve more into the particulars of the healthcare consumer and provider versions of our PHP, I'd like to clarify a main premise I'm making: An abundance of relevant, personalized information about your physical, mental, and mind-body health problems and risks gives you greater understanding of how best to deal with them.

      This may sound logical—the more you know and understand, the more effective your decisions and actions—but I've been debating this issue for many years with healthcare professionals who are more concerned about time constraints and information overload, than on comprehensive knowledge and understanding. As I wrote in a series of three posts about information overload and how to avoid it, accumulating massive amounts of health information over a person's lifetime need not cause overload if we deliver it in reports that save time and reduce confusion by:

      • Filtering out irrelevant information, so a person stays focused on what's important
      • "Serving up" the information as needed, rather than requiring a person to search for it
      • Personalizing the presentation, so that the information is tailored to a person's preferences (i.e., it is presented in a personalized manner to minimize confusion, increase clarity, and maximize ease-of-use)
      • Organizing and summarizing the information in a way that enables people to examine the data from different perspectives, as well as to "drill down" from the general to the underlying details
      • Tailoring instruction (education materials) to a person's ability to learn and particular information needs.

      The PHP application incorporates all these capabilities.

      Nevertheless, this still begs the question: Why do we need so much data? After all, there are health assessment instruments that ask as few as five or six questions (EQ-5D and SF-6D), behavioral health instruments that have as few as 24 or 32 questions (BASIS-24 and 32), and personal health records (including data storage web sites) that are limited to asking a few dozen questions and track a dozen or so types of information (i.e., a person's vital signs, diagnoses, medications, basic lab results, treatment procedures, allergies, inoculations, diet, sleep, activity levels, stress/mood and emergency contact information).

      The PHP, on the other hand, contains thousands of questions (using sophisticated branching logic, so only the questions pertinent to a person are asked), and manages hundreds of different data types (not to mention adding decision support and self-help tools). But why bother being so comprehensive? Isn't it true that "less is more?"

      Having written extensively about this issue here and here, let me know say that when it comes to healthcare, the adage "more is less" not only doesn't apply, but less knowledge is dangerous! Healthcare providers and consumers often lack the knowledge needed for making consistently good, well-informed decisions. In fact, a knowledge void is a key reason we have a healthcare crisis, and why consumers rarely get high-value care. That's because better health-related decisions come from having "deeper" (more complete) understanding of a person's body, mind, spirituality, and environment, which can only come from having an abundance of relevant knowledge. Why? Because the accuracy and dependability of your understandings depend directly on how much you know about a wide variety of important things.

      So, when it comes to making decisions about preventing, diagnosing, self-managing, and treating health problems, more complete knowledge results in better decisions and outcomes.

      For example, only after analyzing a considerable amount and diversity of information can we gain the knowledge we need to all the following:

      • Determine relationships between the medications a person is taking and how their side-effects (or drug-drug interactions) may be causing or exacerbating the person's symptoms and abnormal lab test results
      • Determine relationships between a person's medical conditions, stress levels, diet, metabolic functioning, and environmental influences, and the person's symptoms and abnormal lab test results
      • Predict if one's health is improving or being maintained, or if risk factors are likely to become illnesses due to aging or deteriorating health
      • Discover what types of treatments and preventive interventions work best for particular types of individuals with particular health conditions.

      And when it comes to diagnosing complex or multifaceted medical conditions, and problems with a psychological component, a substantial amount of information is also often necessary. For example, it is important to assess the nature, severity, and etiology (causes) of the depressive symptoms in light of a person's current life-events, past experiences, and personal demographics. This means using a vast data pool that measures such things as:

      • The intensity, frequency, duration, and cyclical time occurrences of the depression
      • The etiology of the depression, including family history, current psychosocial and biomedical problems, medication side-effects, and psychoactive substance abuse
      • The nature and degree of dysfunctional cognition associated with the depression such as thoughts of helplessness, hopelessness, suicidal ideation, self-deprecation, and existential/spiritual dilemmas, as well as cognitive slowing, rigidity, and focusing problems
      • The nature and degree of concomitant (co-occurring) physiological symptoms such as lethargy versus agitation, changes in sleeping and eating patterns, and physical complaints
      • The nature and degree of behavioral disruptions such as social alienation versus clinging dependence, and occupation or education dysfunction
      • The nature and degree of coexisting emotional problems such as anger toward self, anxiety, guilt, and shame
      • Demographics, such as age, sex, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status.

      Even health status and risk appraisals used by wellness coaches often require extensive data for establishing, implementing, and evaluating well-care plans. This data pool includes such things as a person's:

      • Background information (demographics)
      • Health exams and interventions
      • General health status
      • Attitudes about health
      • Symptoms
      • Existing health problems/conditions
      • Biometrics (weight, blood pressure, cholesterol levels, vital signs)
      • Health risk factors
      • Psychological/emotional quality of life
      • Distressing life events
      • Personal achievement & success, personal power & influence
      • Self-esteem, self-competence & confidence
      • Life purpose & meaning , goodness of life. life satisfaction
      • Interest, involvement, and enjoyment of your daily activities
      • Stress and trauma
      • Work-related issues
      • Caregiver responsibilities
      • Social relationships
      • Emotional state, mood
      • Coping strategies
      • Physical activity & exercise
      • Nutrition
      • Sleep
      • Energy levels
      • Wellness coaching preferences
      • Areas to address with coach.

      Here, too, the PHP application manages all this information, and much more.

      Up to this point, I've been focused on the importance of comprehensive knowledge to an individual's health & quality of life. This issue, however, extends to the quality of our entire healthcare system. Here, for example, is a link to an explanation of Sir Muir Gray, Chief Knowledge Office of Britain's National Health Services, about how the lack of adequate healthcare knowledge is preventing us from solving the following "magnificent 8 problems:

      • Errors and mistakes
      • Poor quality healthcare
      • Waste
      • Unknowing variations in policy & practice
      • Poor patient experience
      • Overenthusiastic adoption of interventions of low value
      • Failure to get new evidence into practice
      • Failure to manage uncertainty.

      He continues:

      [We are currently in a] third industrial (and therefore, healthcare) revolution [that] is driven by citizens, IT and knowledge. Professionals are by and large two decades off the zeitgeist and this is not restricted to healthcare, it's seen across all professions.

      Knowledge is the enemy of disease, the application of what we know will have a bigger impact than any drug or technology likely to be introduced in the next decade. I'm talking about three types of knowledge here Statistics, Evidence and Mistakes [italics added] we need to be able to deliver these as simply and abundantly as we deliver clean water… What we're introducing in NHS bodies is a Chief Knowledge Officer--because you need energy to make knowledge appear everywhere….We should be thinking systems rather than structures, recognizing the network that runs alongside every bureaucracy is responsible for innovation.

      While I would argue that his three types of knowledge don't cover all bases, I fully agree that we need to do a much better job in generating, sharing, and using a great diversity of knowledge focused on fixing our healthcare system and improving outcomes all each patients/consumers.

      While current day personal health records do little, if anything, to address these global, systemic problems, the PHP system is designed to do support the kind of research that generates the knowledge needed to solve the magnificent 8 problems.

      So, the vision I'm espousing—which focuses on improving people's health and wellbeing through the development, sharing and use of wide-ranging knowledge—spans from the individual patient/consumer, sick-care provider and wellness coach to the entire healthcare system. My sincere desire to help turn this vision into a reality has kept me motivated for over 25 years in evolving the PHP system.

      Click here for the post in this series.

      Monday, April 07, 2008

      Personal Health Profiler™: Part 1

      In these next series of posts, I’m going to delve into the details of a truly next-generation personal health record (PHR); well, it's actually, more like a personal health knowledge system. As I discussed in my last post, one key component of a better healthcare system is a very cost-efficient and easy-to-use way to gain and use valid knowledge to improve outcomes and control costs. This is where I've been focusing much of my professional life for almost three decades. I'm now going to write about a paradigm-busting software technology I've been developing over this period. Some may see this as self-serving, but my deepest hope is to develop good collaborative relationships and help bring social good. First, some background.

      Twenty-seven years ago, I began a career as a licensed clinical psychologist. That same year, 1981, was also the time that the personal computer (PC) became available and I was intrigued. As I began learning about computers, the power of spreadsheet software caught my attention. I wondered if there was a way to use spreadsheet technology to manage patient information in a way that would:

      • Help clinicians/practitioners of any type develop better treatment plans, deliver better care, and develop professionally through ongoing feedback about the progress and results (outcomes) of the care rendered.
      • Help consumers (i.e., patients, clients and others utilizing well-care and sick-care services) to make better decisions and take more responsible actions--when dealing with health problems and other difficult life situations--through increased their self-understanding, knowledge of options, and structured guidance.
      • Help researchers and policy-makers develop, validate, and disseminate best-practice guidelines.

      A key question that came to my mind was this: How can a computer help an individual and his/her healthcare professionals understand how the person’s health, wellbeing and quality of life are affected by his/her:

      • Thinking processes (one’s beliefs, attitudes, perceptions, etc.);

      • Emotional processes (how one feels in different situations and why);

      • Behavioral tendencies (including how and a person act in self-defeating ways);

      • Coping strategies (how one tends to deal with life problems and the benefits one receives) ; and

      • Mind-body interactions?

      My quest to find an answer resulted in a two and a half decade journey of creative discovery.

      Before I present and discuss the details of my radical innovation, I’d like to reiterate my full-disclosure: The software to which I’m referring is the Personal Health Profiler™ (PHP™) application, which is owned by my company (National Health Data Systems, Inc.) and incorporates processes I patented in 1998. My intention here is to gain exposure for my invention with the goal of stimulating dialogue about new directions for personal health records, as well as sparking creative collaboration projects aimed at transforming our current healthcare system.

      Now that the brief background and disclosure are out of the way, this post will focus on one of the many unique abilities of the Personal Health Profiler™: Its comprehensiveness and personalized navigation. In other words, the PHP software handles a much greater depth and breadth of health data than any other PHR. It presents this useful information--via web-based or desktop (stand-alone) applications--in interactive reports for consumers and health professionals. A simple mouse-click process enables an individual to “drill-down” from high level views (showing only the data category headings) to increasingly detailed views and self-help modules that are tailored to a person’s particular needs.

      The image below (which can be expanded by clicking it) shows the least detailed ("highest" level) view of the PHP’s Whole-Person Health & Wellness Profile (note that clinical profiles for healthcare and wellness professionals are also available). Included in a PHP profile is information derived from:

      • Data entered manually by an individual via an intelligent "branching logic" process that I will demonstrate in a future post. Depending on the situation and type of profile being generated, the data may be entered the consumer/patient, a caregiver, and/or an authorized health professional.
      • Data obtained from external databases, such as healthcare provider's electronic medical records (EMRs).
      • Documents and other sources, including sick-care (treatment) and well-care (preventive & self-maintenance) guidelines, links to pertinent web sites, etc.

      As you can see by the data category headings, the PHP data are divided into five major (“first-level”) categories of data (in red). Within these main categories are 29 "second-level" categories (in yellow). Also notice that there are grey buttons in the right column with a down-pointing arrow.
      click to enlarge image

      Although the PHP application does not look like it's a spreadsheet grid (see below), it is one, and it takes advantage of a spreadsheet's powerful, flexible computational and automation (macro) capabilities. In the screenshot above, for example, each data category heading "resides" on its own row of spreadsheet cells.
      click to enlarge image


      What you don't yet see (but will shortly) are the many additional rows beneath each heading row, which contain the person's actual health data. In the following image, I enabled the spreadsheet's column letters (top) and row numbers (left) to be visible temporarily, so you can see how many of the rows are hidden from view. For example, 77 rows of data related to possible symptoms are hidden between rows 139 and 216. This report, in fact, has about 1,400 rows of headings and data, of which only 34 rows are currently visible.

      As shown in the image below, a person simply double-clicks an arrow next to any data category heading to reveal its details by displaying the rows beneath them. In this example, the button next to the Distressing Life Events heading is being clicked ...
      click to enlarge


      The PHP then displays the pertinent information as shown below. In this example, the person has reported some degree of distress concerning eight life events (out of a possible 19 in the current assessment), with health problems being the most upsetting and stressful.

      Note that the other 11 life events, which are not problematic for the person, remain hidden since they are not distressing. Also note that there are buttons in the left column on every data row showing an open lock symbol. If the person wants to share his/her information with certain healthcare professionals, clicking those buttons enables him/her to authorize access to certain individuals, while preventing access from others. This gives the person complete control over the privacy of his/her personal health information. click to enlarge

      As per the image below, let's say the person double-clicks the down arrow next to “Having serious medical problems."
      click to enlarge

      This next image shows some of the details about the way the person thinks and feels about his/her medical problems. It also has an orange button labeled: “Manage this Problem.”
      click to enlarge

      Clicking that button launches the Coping & Problem Solving module, which starts with a brief interpretation of the person’s thoughts and feelings about the medical problem, as shown in the screen shot below. [Note that the screen shots below, unlike the ones above, are built with spreadsheet program's "user forms" instead of spreadsheet grids.]

      No matter which distressing life event is selected, the person can then click the green “Solve It” button to be guided through a comprehensive “transactional problem solving” process that helps him/her deal with the problem.
      click to enlarge

      After clicking the Solve It button, the Introduction window appears, as shown below.
      click to enlarge

      Clicking “Next” brings up the first Coping & Problems Solving screen, as shown below. Note that this window has a yellow “See More” button.
      click to enlarge

      Clicking the “See More” button displays an analysis and interpretation of the person’s coping strategies.
      click to enlarge

      I’m going to stop here, but the Coping & Problems Solving process continues through a series of instructional and action steps that guides the person in:

      • Changing maladaptive thinking and reducing self-defeating emotions (from a Cognitive-Behavioral and Rational-Emotive therapeutic framework),

      • Building and evaluating possible plans of action to solve (or at least control) the problem,

      • Implementing the best plans,

      • Assessing the results, and

      • Trying to solve it again, if it is wise to do so, or learning to tolerate it better if it cannot be solved.

      Note that a person can discuss his/her problem-solving plans with others and even share the details of his/her Coping & Problems Solving steps with a wellness coach, counselor, or therapist.

      I’ve barely scratched the surface. In subsequent posts, I will:

      • Show the details of other categories of data
      • Discuss how the information supplied by the PHP can be used by coaches/counselors/therapists to help break through consumer's inertia and promote positive lifestyle change for better overall health & wellbeing and self-maintenance of chronic conditions
      • Discuss the Coping & Problem-Solving process in more detail, focusing on how it can help consumers help themselves, as well as assisting their coaches/counselors/therapists Demonstrate how a person can authorize different people to view particular pieces of information and prevent other data from being accessed
      • Describe the processes for:
        • Manually inputting data using sophisticated branching logic
        • Modifying, updating, and tracking changes over time
        • Obtaining data automatically from external databases
        • Storing the Profile data in "individual record files"
        • Using computational algorithms (rules) to analyze the data
        • Developing, updating, and modifying reports
        • Sharing a data file securely
        • Accommodating any current and future data standards
        • Expanding, modifying, and validating data sets
        • Working in conjunction with other software technologies
        • Building research knowledge bases
        • Incorporating "information therapy" materials
        • Supporting centralized, decentralized (peer-to-peer), web-enabled, and asynchronous desktop architectures/platforms
      • Explain many of the unique yet simple technical methods that make all this possible.

      I plan to have a fully functional version of the PHP application available sometime this month, so collaborators can obtain their own profile and offer feedback.

      I welcome your questions and comments.

      My next post focuses on the need for much greater knowledge and the role PHP can play.

      Monday, March 31, 2008

      The Whole-Person Integrated-Care (WPIC) Wellness Solution: Part 6

      In the first five parts of this series on the Whole-Person Integrated-Care (WPIC) Wellness Solution, I discussed how particular personality characteristics -- i.e., one's cognitions (thoughts), emotions, knowledge, and coping strategies -- determine whether or not people take good care of their health. On one end of the spectrum are the self-motivated "Activists" who are eager to attain and maintain excellent health. On the other end are the "Ignorer/Deniers," who, for a myriad of reasons, strongly and consistently resist self-managing their health.

      I now begin to answer the question: What's necessary for people to change the way they think, feel and act in a way that promotes healthy living?

      I assert that AWARENESS is the place to start. It's obvious that people have little incentive to change if they are unaware that they have health problems, risks, or are managing chronic conditions poorly. Whether due to ignorance or self-deception, the first thing these people need is greater awareness of their health status and probable future. Becoming aware of their health problems, risks and poor self-management tends to give rise to fear. This fear is based on their belief that they will experience pain, become disabled, or die. For some, such fear a motivator. For others, the fear leads to denial, so it's wise for them to "reframe" the situation in terms of "joy of life" rather than "fear of death," as I discussed in an earlier post. Nevertheless, awareness is essential.

      Things that can promote self-awareness are other people, media, and information technology. These people may be sick-care professionals (e.g., doctors, nurses and therapists); well-care coaches and counselors; family and friends; and even "virtual acquaintances" through Internet-based social networking (see Web 2.0). Media include web sites, TV, movies, newspapers, books, etc. Information technology includes health information systems, such as personal health records (PHRs) and online health data repositories.

      In this post, I'm going to focus on the good and bad of health information technology for consumers since there is great debate about their usefulness. See, for example, this recent article in Business Week about Google and Microsoft's Internet-based products for electronic healthcare information storage and access, and the Robert Woods Johnson blog for their Project HealthDesign PHR development initiative.

      I content that we are in the "Stone Age" of health information technology. Current day products are not very useful to the typical consumer, and could be much more useful to professionals. That's because the greatest value information is not obtained by simply having a place to store personal health data. Instead, value comes from using these data to help consumers and their healthcare professionals prevent physical and mental health problems, treat acute illnesses, and self-manage chronic conditions.

      So, what about search Internet engines such as Google? Well, they're not of great value either since only 16 percent of online consumers find what they were looking for since search engines tend to focus on breadth rather than on content quality, which means they usually provide an overwhelming number of generic "hits" that are often of questionable validity. This is particularly true for searches on health topics such as alternative medicine, herbal and nutritional supplements, prescription drugs, disease cures, and nutrition. In fact, 70 percent of scientific studies show that quality of online health information is a major problem.[1]

      Things have been improving, however, with web sites such as Helia Health, Organized Wisdom, , Revolution Health, and WebMD. The problem is that they all focus on providing general rather than personalized information. This means people must scan through pages of information and links, the vast majority of which have nothing to do with their needs. And when they finally navigate to where relevant information is located, it tends to be generic, not specific to each individual, which can lead to information overload, knowledge underload, and inaccuracies.

      What's needed is an easy, low-cost way for data from health care providers and consumers, no matter where they are stored, to be transformed into useful information. This information should not only increase people's awareness of their current health status and risks through comprehensive holistic assessments, but also provide targeted personalized information that increases their knowledge and understanding about the most cost-effective ways to deal with troubling health-related issues. These issues may include such things as coping with a stressful life situation, changing unhealthy lifestyles, adhering to one's plan of care, making valid diagnosis, and deciding wisely about which treatment option and insurance plan to choose. As I discussed in a previous post, these capabilities go way beyond data storage and access and enter into the realm of personalized, holistic (mind-body-spirit) decision-support and self-help assistance. Today's PHRs are very immature regarding these types of capabilities.

      I've long been recommending the creation of disruptive (radical, discontinuous) technologies that are able to achieve the lofty goals I described above. By way of full disclosure, I've been developing such a system, called the Personal Health Profiler™, for over two decades. It is a major departure from the kinds of PHRs and web sites in use today in that it promotes rapid and more complete understanding of a person's:

      • Current physiological, psychological and mind-body functioning and risks
      • Wellness interventions and self-management plans
      • Sick-care treatments
      • Changes in health status (trends over time)
      • Clinical outcomes and costs of care received.

      This information is presented in a personal health profile and yields better (deeper and broader) understanding of a person's problems and needs, thereby improving diagnostic and treatment/intervention decisions. It comes from analyses of detailed data about the relationships between one's:

      • Internal factors--including problematic physical signs and symptoms, illnesses, emotions, and cognitions (thoughts, attitudes, perceptions, beliefs, "self-schemas," attributions & appraisals, expectations, memories, etc.), and knowledge & understanding.
      • Behaviors--including diet, exercise, alcohol and substance use, risky activities, sleep, mobility, etc.
      • External influences/causes--including stressful interpersonal relationships, stressful and unhealthy physical (e.g., work, living) environments, economic pressures, etc. on the one hand, and supportive conditions that promote good health on the other hand.
      • Medications and abnormal lab test results --to identify possible interactions (e.g., how certain drugs being taken may be causing one's white blood cell count to drop and interfering with one's sleep).
      • Mind and body-- such as medication side-e