Internet users comprise a mass population, and their numbers increase every year. The development of Internet technologies is also growing, and it has been made more sophisticated the introduction of Information and Communication Technologies’ (ICTs’) research achievements and sciences theories. The uses of the Internet in medicine ensure the four main roles cited in (1), i.e., 1) a support network, 2) a source of information, 3) a place to compare treatment options, and 4) a mechanism for sharing information among those concerned with medical issues, i.e., caregivers, family, and friends. Diverse individuals, groups, and organizations can create online medical information and resources that can be retrieved and used by those involved with providing medical care (2). Regardless of the important influence and potential of online health information technologies, the actual exploration can prove the existence of problems of inconsistency, such as those detected and cited in (1), which addressed the concern that online information can be inaccurate, incomplete, controversial, misleading, and alarming to people who are seeking answers to health-related questions. The inconsistency in the online content can have a significant influence on patients’ behaviors (1, 3). Consequently, it is vital to develop solutions to understand how to identify online information that is inconsistent and contradictory (3).
The web 2.0 definition was first introduced by O’Reilly in 2005, who wrote about a mature, distinctive medium characterized by network effects, openness, and the participation of users (4, 5). The web 2.0 applications as well as, social networks, attract billions of Internet users for their simplistic amiability and interactivity. The health 2.0 applications based on the web 2.0 technologies provide a trusted tie between those involved with the healthcare system, i.e., doctors, patients, and other users). In addition, the most important characteristic of health 2.0 applications is the mass uses and access of information by a diversity of categories of users. This characteristic emphasizes the necessity of introducing artificial intelligence, data mining, information retrieval, information filtering, recommender systems, and other ICTs to help ensure efficient and appropriate utilization.
Medical informatics is crucial, and it is a concern of several organizations, companies, and associations. Although the relationship between all of those involved with medical issues has yet to be considered comprehensively in our society, it represents an active research area and a strong element for disease prevention and follow-up. In this editorial, I propose a research project entitled ‘Reuse And Mining Health 2.0 Resources’ (RAMHeR), which will be focused on providing a global platform for developing solutions for the crucial problems associated with inconsistent, inaccurate, and misleading medical information. The project also will focus on ways to develop and advise those involved with the healthcare system to make them more aware of the significant influence of Health 2.0. In this project, we plan to initiate a source of Health 2.0 integration in order to enhance the viability of this important domain and to ensure the effective consideration and deployment of the recommended solutions.
Footnotes
Conflict of Interest:
Dr. Abdeljalil Khelassi is an associate editor of Electronic physician.
References
- 1.Sue Black, Jacobs Joanne.Using Web 2.0 to Improve Software Quality Treude Christoph, Storey Margaret-Anne, Ehrlich Kate, van Deursen Arie.Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Web 2.0 for Software Engineering Web2SE ‘10 2010May01–08Cape Town, South Africa. New York, NY, USA: ACM; ©20106–11. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Taylor Carl, Dajani Lubna.The future of Homecare Systems in the context of the Ubiquitous Web and its related mobile technologies Makedon Fillia, Baillie Lynne, Pantziou Grammati, Maglogiannis Ilias.Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Pervasive Technologies Related to Assistive PETRA ‘08 2008July15–19Athens, Greece. Environments, New York, NY, USA: ACM; ©2008. Article No. 43 [Google Scholar]
- 3.Katz Matthew S, et al. The ‘CaP Calculator’: an online decision support tool for clinically localized prostate cancer. BJU INT. 2010 May;105(10):1417–1422. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09290.x. Epub 2010 Mar 15. Cited in: PubMed; [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Silber Denise. Médecine 2.0 : les enjeux de la médecine participative. Internet médical. 2009 Oct;38(10):1456–1462. doi: 10.1016/j.lpm.2009.06.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Phillippi Julia C, et al. Web 2.0: Easy Tools for Busy Clinicians. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2010 Sep-Oct;55(5):472–6. doi: 10.1016/j.jmwh.201005.009. Cited in: PubMed; [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]