Highlight HEALTH

Highlight HEALTH will be hosting the next edition of Pediatric Grand Rounds, volume 2 edition 8, on Sunday, July 29th. As host, I invite you to send your submissions.

What is Pediatric Grand Rounds?

Pediatric Grand Rounds (PGR) is a bi-weekly blog carnival of the best posts pertaining to the health of children. PGR is a way for bloggers - parents, doctors, teachers, nurses - anyone interested in pediatric health issues to interact and share their thoughts, feeling, stories and articles. Past editions can be found at the Pediatric Grand Rounds Archive.

Please note that your blog doesn’t have to be about pediatric health issues as long at the article you submit is relevant.

• As a parent, do you have a story about child illness, injury or preventive care?
• Have you written an article regarding a news story related to the health of children?
• As a health professional, do you have an experience dealing with pediatric health?

I strongly encourage submissions from bloggers who have never submitted before. Submitting to PGR is a great way to meet members of the pediatric health community, make people aware of your blog and bring blog traffic your way.

Submission Format:

Subject line: PGR submission
Email body:
- Submitted Post Title
- Submitted Post URL

Send your submissions to me using the email address on the sidebar no later than Friday, July 27th at 04:00:00 UTC (12:00pm CST).

Receive e-mail notification when PGR 2.8 is published.

Let’s make this another great collection of the best posts pertaining to the health of children. I look forward to your submissions!

The HONcode is the oldest and most widely used ethical code concerning the quality and trustworthiness of medical and health related information available on the internet. It was created for evaluating medical and health websites and outlines eight ethical standards in the presentation of medical and health information online.

To become HONcode accredited and display the HONcode seal, there is an application process and an annual review. The aim of the HONcode is to protect the reader by ensuring that they know the source and purpose of medical and health information they read on the internet.

A new ethical code designed specifically for the healthcare blogger is the Healthcare Blogger Code of Ethics. The code allows the blogger to identify the standards by which they blog. The Healthcare Blogger Code of Ethics covers issues pertaining to confidentiality, privacy and commercial disclosure. It offers some protection for both the reader, in terms of blogger disclosure of credentials and financial interests, and the blogger, by providing documentation of their blogs focus and intent.

A second logo is available for those non-medical bloggers who post medically-oriented content in accord with the code but did not feel it appropriate to represent themselves as medical bloggers.

Healthcare Blogger Code of Ethics

1. Clear representation of perspective

Readers must understand the training and overall perspective of the author of a blog. Certainly bloggers can have opinions on subjects outside of their training, and these opinions may be true, but readers must have a place to look on a blog to get an idea of where this author is coming from. This also encompasses the idea of the distinction between advertisement and content. This does not preclude anonymous blogging, but it asks that even anonymous bloggers share the professional perspective from which they are blogging.

2. Confidentiality

Medical bloggers must respect the nature of the relationship between patient and medical professionals and the clear need for confidentiality. All discussions of patients must be done in a way in which patients’ identity cannot be inferred.

3. Commercial Disclosure

The presence or absence of commercial ties of the author must be made clear for the readers. If the author is using their blog to pitch a product, it must be clear that they are doing that. Any ties to device manufacturer and/or pharmaceutical company ties must be clearly stated.

4. Reliability of Information

Citing sources when appropriate and changing inaccuracies when they are pointed out.

5. Courtesy

Bloggers should not engage in personal attacks, nor should they allow their commenters to do so. Debate and discussion of ideas is one of the major purposes of blogging. While the ideas people hold should be criticized and even confronted, the overall purpose is a discussion of ideas, not those who hold ideas.

If these are principles you use in your blogging and would like your blog added to the list of websites agreeing to the code, either go the the Healthcare Blogger Code of Ethics website or email the site administrator.

The Washington Post is reporting that the decade-old State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), which expires in September and was expected to be renewed and possibly expanded, is held up in Congress. The debate is the proper role of government in healthcare.

The $5 billion dollar program annually helps 6.6 million low-income, uninsured American children see doctors when they’re sick. Both the U.S. House and Senate are proposing deals to expand the program and increase funding over the next five years, proposals the President characterizes as attempts to enlarge the federal role of healthcare and reduce private insurance coverage for some children. According to the article, the President:

… has proposed about $5 billion in new funding for children’s health insurance over five years, for a total of $30 billion - an amount that the Congressional Budget Office says would be too little to keep covering even just the number of children enrolled in the program now.

The State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) is a U.S. national program for families who earn too much to be eligible for Medicaid but cannot afford private insurance. Started in 1997, the program was designed to address an ever-growing problem of children without health insurance.

A recent study that examined the extent to which SCHIP affects access to healthcare and service use found that enrollment improved access to care relative to being uninsured [1]. Children enrolled in SCHIP were more likely to receive office visits, preventive health and dental care, and specialty care. Additionally, they were more likely to have a usual source for medical and dental care and to report better provider communication and accessibility. SCHIP enrollees were less likely to have unmet needs, financial burdens and parental worry associated with meeting their child’s health care needs.

As an alternative to the Senate and House proposals to use tax increases to extend health insurance benefits, President Bush is suggesting tax credits. Whitehouse spokesman Tony Fratto has indicated that senior advisors will recommend the President veto any legislation that would increase funds for children’s health insurance.

Which do you think is better - a tax increase or tax credits?

References

1. Kenney G. The Impacts of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program on Children Who Enroll: Findings from Ten States. Health Serv Res. 2007 Aug;42(4):1520-43.
   View abstract