Been quite busy here on a number of projects as I prepare for a long overdue break and head to where else, Chilmark.
In and amongst all those projects I received an email last week notifying me that the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) and California Healthcare Foundation’s (CHCF) Project HealthDesign had released a new report. Project HealthDesign is a multi-year, $5M effort to “assist technology pioneers to create a new generation of PHR systems.”
From what I have seen to date, their efforts are certainly well-intentioned but tend to very academic, as in funding academic researchers. Subsequently, much of what has been produced seems diffused, lacking an understanding of “the business of PHRs” and not having the punch and influence of their counterpart in this sector, The Markle Foundation.
But every now and then I get a surprise and last week’s email from Project HealthDesign announcing the release of a new report (caution PDF) is a clear example. While the title of the report is atrocious (a 22 word title! – very, very academic) its content is actually quite good providing a thorough review of the major platform plays (Google Health and Microsoft HealthVault) and the standards being used for data sharing.
Even better than the report, which can get verbose and may be a good substitute for Ambien (did they ever think to have a few figures) is the concise Comparitive Analysis Appendix. This Excel spreadsheet provides a fabulous analysis of what these platforms do and do not offer today. Great tool to compare and contrast these two platforms, though I’m willing to bet that much of it wil be dated within 6 months.
Sean Nolan, Chief Architect for HealthVault found some inaccuracies in the analysis and provides clarification over on his blog.
0 Comments