The Mayo Clinic Center for Social Media yesterday announced an Advisory Board made up of some of the most forward thinking members of the social health community.
Now the idea of doctors never crossed my mind until I noticed this in the Twitter stream from Dr. Ves Dimov.
It got me thinking: Does the Mayo Clinic Center for Social Media really need physician advisors?
After all, physician involvement in all levels of social media is scarce. The medical profession has been dangerously slow to accept the ideals that the social health community promotes. Maybe physicians haven’t earned a seat at the table. Or better yet, perhaps past performance suggests that we have nothing constructive to add. Mayo’s exclusion of physicians in their initial stab at an advisory panel profoundly reflects the changing role of the traditional provider in the new social order.
But until physicians are replaced by the hive, even Mayo understands that we still represent some piece of a relationship that helps to maintain wellness and treat disease. And with respect to our conspicuous absence in the infosphere, the tide is slowly turning. Look for the evolving medical leadership of a more digital generation in the very near future.
Ultimately The Mayo Clinic Center for Social Media owes the medical community nothing. They’re on their way with a panel of advisors who have risen in their respective facilities without necessarily the love and well wishes of their medical staff. Despite their willingness to invite the collective wisdom of the crowd, Mayo can and should do what works for their private enterprise, not for what any one interest group feels they are entitled.
Earlier this month one of the patient community’s more vociferous advocates publicly cried foul when it was felt that The Mayo Clinic had not properly represented patients at their Transform Conference.
Don’t look to me to do the same.
Look for The Mayo Clinic Center for Social Media Advisory Board to expand to involve a more diverse representation of social health. But what an interesting statement it would make if physicians didn’t make the cut.
Addendum: I’ve been reminded by The Mayo Clinic that the Center for Social Media is under the medical direction of Victor Montori, a physician.
{ 4 comments }
The call for the crowdsourced half of he advisory does call for physicians so I would like to encourage any physicians to be involved. There are many who are web 2.0 savvy and their voices are needed if the advisory is to do the right thing when connecting social media, medicine and health. I think the other question about ‘making the cut’ is more important. I personally, would like to know how they will evaluate truly crowdsourced applicants. The current half does little to help us identify the evaluation criteria… would love to hear your thoughts
It’s impossible to answer that question, Kirsti. It’s really dependent upon how they plan to use this board. There are a number of physicians with wildly differing skill sets in this space. Selection would depend upon the board’s needs.
Hi Bryan
My short answer: Yes! But I can see why Dr. Ves Dimov might question that.
Here’s my reasoning:
Nurses and doctors have important perspectives on the human condition. They understand the need for delivering quality care on top of scientific approaches.
How emerging media affects culture and healthcare is one of the most important matters to discuss this century. I can’t think of a reason to exclude physicians from this discussion (wherever it may be, Mayo’s Center or elsewhere – there are so many other places by the way).
Believe me, I’ve been working on the nurse’s side for a while and I completely understand the challenges of getting healthcare professionals to see the value propositions of these evolving media.
Perhaps the sting of this (to some perhaps) may in the long run confer a benefit: the realization of the importance of physician input in one of the most important technological, ideological and sociological changes in thousands of years.
@PhilBaumann
It’s interesting but I don’t consider it a sting necessarily but representative of the changing role of the physician. Not better, not worse, just changing. I think that the medical profession has a long way to go with respect to being part of this dialog. So in that sense I think that Mayo’s inadvertent omission was almost appropriate.
In the end I agree that someone should be there. But thinking about all this is interesting.
{ 1 trackback }