site stats
Welcome, register | help | log in

HealthVoices: Ethics Standards & Call for Bloggers

Featured in:

Kudos to Darren Rowse for urging the Science and Health Blogger community to develop ethics standards. A transparent code of honor is critical to establishing credibility of the new medical media.

Here is HealthVoices response to NIH/NCCAM questionnaire, used by Hsien Hsien Lei of Genetics and Health Blog, and brought to our attention by Enoch Choi of medmusings. Quote and link me on this:


1. Who runs this site?

The site is owned and operated by Dmitriy Kruglyak. Born in Kiev, Ukraine, I have been living and working in Silicon Valley since 1998, in the Health IT field since 2001 and on this project since early 2005.

2. Who pays for the site?

I personally cover all technology and hosting expenses. No sponsors, advertisers or affiliates have decision-making authority over the editorial content. None of the collected data is used for any commercial purpose without member or visitor permission.

3. What is the purpose of the site?

The medical media transformation is in the wings. Open Medicine will follow in the footsteps of Open Media. HealthVoices is the first and so far the only blog network, dedicated solely to health & wellness issues. We are currently recruiting medical bloggers to write feature columns that will ultimately cover every major area of healthcare thought and practice. Our longer-term goal is to develop a broader online health community, built on the principles of Open Medicine.

4. Where does the information come from?

Everywhere! The scope of our intent is vast and the specific sources vary blog by blog. In general we write commentary & opinion on health-related stories published in "mainstream media" with a mix of unique blogger's perspective and experience, within the blog's topical focus.

5. What is the basis of the information?

The facts are referenced by URL or other citation format, as appropriate. Opinions of network bloggers and third parties are clearly attributed. Bloggers are encouraged to adopt "neutral" view to present, analyze and compare competing arguments. We have no scientific, political or religious agenda to push, except Open Medicine.

6. How is the information selected?

The blog topics and entries are chosen based on their relevance to the intended audience: healthcare consumers, practitioners and executives. Sources are selected to highlight the key aspects of an issue. Readers ARE strongly encouraged to tell us where we are right or wrong, and we believe this reflects the spirit of Open Medicine.

7. How current is the information?

Much of the information comes from the commentary on fresh news. Some entries take a longer-term historic perspective. Whenever appropriate, we return to correct ourselves to reflect the recent developments, typically in the comments section or when warranted in the body of a post. Here is a recent example: "Credibility Spat: Blogs vs. Peer-Reviewed Pubs".

8. How does the site choose links to other sites?

Links in content are selected by authors, based on their view of relevance to a topic at hand. They do not represent an endorsement by the Network. Sponsored links and advertisements appear in designated site sections, providing for easy attribution by readers. Advertising served by context-driven ad systems (including Google AdSense) is chosen automatically, based on the relevant page content.

9. What information about you does the site collect, and why?

Commenters are asked to leave contact email, which we promise to keep in confidence, absent a permission to disclose. Readers are encouraged to register for a community membership account. Over time, we expect to create full-featured membership profiles (OPTIONAL) the use of which will always remain permission-based. Detailed policies are coming.

10. How does the site manage interactions with visitors?

Visitors are encouraged to comment on content and become registered and active community members. We believe it is in the spirit of Open Medicine to encourage broad culture of participation, yet we are aware of the potential pitfalls and responsibilities that come with the territory. We promise to air any and all concerns publically and resolve them promptly.


To prospective bloggers who want to join the network: Use feedback form to send a summary of what you consider the topics you feel most passionate about in ProBlogger's format.

Our redesigned look and feel is nearing launch and we expect to roll it out with a few featured blog columns ready to go.

Trackbacks (3)

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://trusted.md/trackback/2170
from In the Pipeline on Tue, 12/13/2005 - 5:08am

Welcome to the latest iteration of Grand Rounds. On behalf of the greedy rapacious pharmaceutical industry, I'm glad to be hosting this week. Unfortunately for everyone, the research end of the G.R.P.I. is not immersed in the ceaseless flow of...

from Genetics and Health on Tue, 12/13/2005 - 2:43am

Thanks to Darren Rowse at ProBlogger, the full disclosure “meme” that I tried to introduce early in the life of Genetics and Health is finally gaining in popularily. Not only is it a fun way to know more about the motivations of medical an...

from The Haversian Canal on Sun, 12/11/2005 - 9:56pm

Dmitriy at healthvoices advised me that Dr Hsien-Hsien Lei recently wrote about the ethics of medical bloggers in which she proposed we should (among other things?) answer these ten questions from The National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medi

Comments (4)

Submitted by John Mack (not verified) on Mon, 12/12/2005 - 2:38pm.

I think many of the principles of the eHealth Code of Ethics (http://www.ihealthcoalition.org/ethics/ehealthcode0524.html) may be suitable for use by medical bloggers.

Submitted by hippocrates on Mon, 12/12/2005 - 4:50pm.

Great starting point. Perhaps these guidelines should be further expanded to address issues unique to blogging...

UPDATE: Join the discussion on ethics standards: Health & Medical Blogs: Professionalize or Perish - A CALL TO ACTION

Submitted by Barry Bell (not verified) on Sun, 01/22/2006 - 1:06pm.

Hi. I'm the owner of the wurk network of blogs, and I'm a little concerned that you're displaying the full content from one of our feeds on your site without my permission. What concerns me even more, is that you're also giving individual entries from our feeds their own permalinked pages on your site, with the ability for your readers to comment on them. But what concerns me the most is that you're wrapping contextual advertising around each of these items in our feed - which means you will obviously benefit financially from content that doesn't belong to you.

Not really something you could call ethical, eh?

So, please consider either one of these options...

1) Firstly, I really don't mind you displaying the headlines and the first 150-200 characters from our feeds (that's why I publish them), as long as these link through to the ORIGINAL article on the wurk site, and NOT to a page on  your site where readers have the ability to permalink to, and to comment on, wurk-owned content.

2) Alternatively, where wurk content is displayed on your site, I would appreciate it if you could use a wurk-owned Google Adsense Publisher ID for any contextual ads that are wrapped around that content. That way, it's the writer of the article who benefits from the content that he or she has written - not you.

I trust that you will implement either one of these solutions immediately.

Regards

Barry Bell
wurk

Submitted by hippocrates on Sun, 01/22/2006 - 3:53pm.

Barry,

A few points:

1) The feeds are posted as you publish them (for distribution, I guess?). This is NOT full content, only excerpts you provide. You can embed ads or anything else you like.

2) We are not stating or implying anywhere that your site is member of our network. Your feed appears in the syndicated feeds section. Exactly as published. With your "excerpt" note and links back.

3) You question ethics. Our ethics efforts focus mainly on MEDICAL ETHICS of blogging. The exact rules for blog/RSS syndication fair use are far from being established. We are open to input.

4) If you do not want to be part of our rapidly growing community of med bloggers, just ask to drop your feed. We might add headlines-only feeds at some point, but not now.

5) If you really want to fume about someone using/monetizing your contents without your permission, complain about Google and Technorati. Go ahead.

If you publish any kind of feed, expect more aggregators to pick it up. Just not everyone would even respond to your requests, like we do.

So you decide what we do. Remove your feed completely or replace with another one you provide.

Regards,
Dmitriy Kruglyak
Publisher, The Medical Blog Network
www.healthvoices.com

UPDATE: The controversy has been resolved to everyone's satisfaction. Barry decided to keep his feed listed with HealthVoices. For details, read the discussion on his blog.

Post new comment

[?]
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Captcha Image: you will need to recognize the text in it.
[?]
Please type in the letters/numbers that are shown in the image above.

User login