I accept advisory roles and invitations to speak about health economics, what the data tells us about shared-decision making and appropriate care, and how to estimate overdiagnosis in screening programs. But until we disseminate valid research findings, appropriate standards of care, and harms from too much medicine (or too little for that matter) we won't be able to influence funding or quality patient outcomes. We need to consider effective strategies to reach our audience. Hence, the marketing integration but not the "how to sell a drug or gain market access" marketing. The focus here is on a dynamic conversation about the evolution of healthcare.
When estimating overdiagnosis we can design randomized controlled trials with adequate long-term follow-up, observational studies of screened versus unscreened populations, pathologists can provide input, or we can use statistical modeling. Obviously if there is a lack of numeracy in medicine these insights will be out of reach of many practitioners. Hopefully, if more writers and professionals begin focusing on data by integrating reliable sources of data into a compelling narrative we will be able to inform, educate, and create a dialogue. Who does this better than marketing professionals? Why not operationalize these tactics to spread the message efficiently to healthcare professionals--outside of financial interests of industry?
How did this happen? I was listening to a podcast and something stuck. Real innovation happens at the intersection of two distinct spheres. Bringing medicine, health policy, health economics together with inbound marketing creates a unique venn diagram that can invigorate stakeholders outside of the pharmaceutical industry. Why not use proven strategies to bring messages of patient centricity, shared decision making, and preventing overdiagnosis to patients and healthcare providers? Remember, it isn't industry writing the prescriptions--its the physicians. Inbound 2015 is my opportunity to examine the intersection of social media and content--storytelling as tools for audiences without the large medical affairs departments or giant brand teams--stay tuned.
"Reading maketh a full man; conference a ready man; and writing an exact man.
And therefore, if a man write little, he had need have a great memory; if he confer little, he had need have a present wit: and if he read little, he had need have much cunning, to seem to know, that he doth not."- Francis Bacon
Two interesting conferences held recently in Bethesda Maryland...
The Scientific Sessions focused on developments at the National Center for Health Statistics in the fields of health, health data, and statistics.
The big take-a-way for me was the availability of data sources important for writing about healthcare and outcomes in the evolving landscape. I will be writing topic specific posts about different "slices" of the data and what it means for policy and care decisions.
The major down-side to the conference? The lack of attendance from colleagues writing or communicating about the status of healthcare in the US. The national conference provides an opportunity to learn the data outside the influence of profit.
This conference is annual although this was my first year attending. Having considered overdiagnosis an American problem I was surprised to see the large international audience (next year will be in Barcelona).
Healthcare providers, researchers, patient advocates, and other media health professionals convened to discuss appropriate identification of overdiagnosis. How do we define overdiagnosis? The focus of the 3-day conference presented data and insights from a variety of scientists, physicians, and media professionals. How do screening programs contribute to overdiagnosis? What are the potential driving factors of inappropriate or ineffective care were
I will be outlining the data and consequences of over-care in future posts once I return from a few presentations out on the conference trail. Stay tuned...