The following is a guest post from Harold DeMonaco, MS, one of our expert editors on HealthNewsReview.org – and of that group – the one who has reviewed the most news stories over the past 6+ years. The opinions stated are his own and not those of his employer.
——————————————————————————————–
We recently ran across a press release from Sermo.com that sent a shiver up my spine. Sermo is a social networking website for physicians. In order to join you must be a practicing physician. Like any social network physicians trade information, stories, rants and the like with each other. The site can also serve as an important method of transmitting information and learned comments within this exclusive club. I have had the privilege of being allowed access and have used the site for some of my research. The site is robust and the discussions are lively, entertaining and informative.
Like all of us, physicians want to make the most valuable use of their time. Given the workload of most of my physician friends, time is a rare and precious commodity for them. So, it is quite reasonable to want to have summaries of the most recent articles published in medical journals. Journal Watch is one such subscription source. There are indeed others but their availability is limited to subscription. Journal Watch costs $149 for an annual subscription. A freely available resource would seem very desirable.
What delivered the spine shiver was this announcement:
Starting today Sermo (http://www.sermo.com), the largest online community exclusive to physicians, will be providing Sermo members curated, daily medical news across 30+ specialties to stay abreast of and discuss the latest developments in medicine. The new service is “powered by” HealthDay, the leading producer and syndicator of evidence-based health and medical news.
Sermo physicians actively discuss and debate topics in the news, from healthcare reform to new treatments and therapies. HealthDay’s Physician’s Briefing service will complement user-generated content and stimulate further conversation by bringing in timely and concise summaries from more than 75 peer-reviewed medical journals, over 55 medical conferences and all major government approvals and announcements.
HealthNewsReview.org has a fairly sizable experience in reviewing the media capabilities in reporting health related stories. A total of 1751 stories have been reviewed to date with an average score of 3.04 stars. We have reviewed 165 stories from HealthDay. Their average is 2.85 stars. One could argue with our criteria and the sample size, but the numbers probably speak for themselves. HealthDay has been a below-average performer based on our criteria.
It is unclear from the press release if the HealthDay resource in Sermo will be different than those generally available to the consumer or if it will be a specialized resource for physicians. It will be interesting to see how the physician community of Sermo rates the quality of reporting by HealthDay in any case.
Comments (2)
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Jon Michaeli
May 29, 2012 at 4:13 pmI believe you are referencing HealthDay’s consumer health news service. Sermo is licensing HealthDay’s Physician’s Briefing news service, which is specifically written for physicians. According to my sources, you have never reviewed this news product.
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.
You might also like