Reflections on pathology and "Web 2.0"

American Journal of Clinical Pathology

Volumn 132, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 813-815

  Wick, Mark R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONTINUING EDUCATION; E-MAIL; EDITORIAL; INFORMATION SERVICE; INTERNET; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL LITERATURE; ONLINE ANALYSIS; PATHOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

HUMANS; INTERNET; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; PATHOLOGY; PUBLISHING; SEARCH ENGINE; TELEMEDICINE;

EID: 72949120373     PISSN: 00029173     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1309/AJCP78XCLISUEIIF     Document Type: Editorial

References (19)

1. Schreiber WE, Giustini DM. Pathology in the era of Web 2.0. Am J Clin Pathol. 2009;132:824-828.
2. Shirts BH, Gundlapalli AV, Jackson B. Pilot study of linking Web-based supplemental interpretive information to laboratory test reports. Am J Clin Pathol. 2009;132:818-823.
3. Short message service or silent messaging service. http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/SMS. Accessed October 23, 2009.
4. Twitter Web site. http://www.twitter.com. Accessed October 23, 2009.
5. Concord Law School, Kaplan University Web site. http://www. concordlawschool.edu. Accessed October 23, 2009.
6. Currier B. Riding the wave of the future, Kaplan Higher Education Web site. http://www.rethinkinghighereducation.com/2009/09/riding-the-wave-of-the- future/#more. Published September 30, 2009. Accessed October 23, 2009.
7. Hughes B, Joshi I, Wareham J. Health 2.0 and Medicine 2.0: tensions and controversies in the field. J Med Internet Res. 2008;10:e23. doi:10.2196/jmir.1056.
8. Giustini D. How Web 2.0 is changing medicine [editorial]. BMJ. 2006;333:1283-1284.
9. CytoJournal Web page. http://www.cytojournal.com. Accessed October 23, 2009.
10. Dermatology Online Journal Web page. http://dermatology.cdlib.org. Accessed October 23, 2009.
11. Bentham Open. The Open Surgery Journal Web page. http://bentham.org/open/tosj. Accessed October 23, 2009.
12. Open source biotechnology project. http://rsss.anu.edu.au/~janeth/home. html. Accessed October 23, 2009.
13. Center for Workforce Studies, American Association of Medical Colleges. Physician Specialty Data: A Chart Book. Chicago, IL: American Association of Medical Colleges; 2006. http://services.aamc.org/publications/showfile.cfm? file=version67.pdf&prd-id=160&prv-id=190&pdf-id=67. Accessed October 23, 2009.
14. Wick MR, Bourne TD, Patterson JW, et al. Evidence-based principles and practices in pathology: selected problem areas. Semin Diagn Pathol. 2005;22:116-125.
15. Childs D, Chang H, Grayson A. President-elect urges electronic medical records in 5 years: companies scramble to develop new technology; docs slow to adopt. ABC News Politics Web page. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/President44/ story?id=6606536&page=1&page=1. Published January 9, 2009. Accessed October 23, 2009.
16. Gandhi TK. Fumbled handoffs: one dropped ball after another. Ann Intern Med. 2005;142:352-358.
17. Bowles KH. The barriers and benefits of nursing information systems. Comput Nurs. 1997;15:191-196.
18. Simon SR, McCarthy ML, Kaushal R, et al. Electronic health records: which practices have them, and how are clinicians using them? J Eval Clin Pract. 2008;14:43-47.
19. McMahon DJ. The future of privacy in a unified national health information infrastructure. Seton Hall Law Rev. 2008;38:787-797.