Thursday, September 29, 2011

The Ticket Store Game Launches Online

Offering a Revolutionary Approach to Parenting for a New Generation of Tech-Savvy Familie

As TED (Technology Entertainment Design) keynote speaker Jane McGonigal brought to light in her talk "Gaming Can Make a Better World," we can use desire, focus, rewards and 3 billion hours a week of experience we have with virtual gaming to impact positive changes in the real world.

The Ticket Store Game is the ultimate application of this theory to improve child behavior, introducing an online interactive game and connecting the virtual world with positive behavior changes in the real world. While the traditional board game has been successfully utilized in over 10 countries, the online game brings the concept to a modern level.

With a new generation of families with tech-savvy parents and kids, The Ticket Store Game provides a new virtual platform in which kids are comfortable interacting. As an online children’s development strategy, the game leverages a parent’s effort in behavior modification through positive reinforcement and pioneers modernized virtual relationships for better child listening and responsiveness.

Following Malcolm Gladwell’s "Outliers" formula for success, being 10,000 hours spent on an effort, and knowing kids typically spend that many hours with virtual games by the time they are 18—if even a portion of that time is applied to The Ticket Store Game, the result is "virtuosos" of good behavior.

The Ticket Store Game offers an advanced approach in making responsive and responsible acts attractive. Creating a virtual board game with animated characters and avatars, parents assign each child tasks to complete in exchange for ticketed rewards. Parents/teachers and children craft personalized game boards to provide the ultimate recompense for favorable behavior. A digital piggy bank is available to accumulate tickets and allow the child to use their savings to "cash" in for rewards. A bonus board welcomes kids to move through "Tickieville" to earn additional tickets for community service, online library reading, performing a school activity and more. The Ticket Store Game provides a world of real life experiences to improve kids behavior.

The Ticket Store Game is not just for home use. The concepts of ownership, savings, community service, anti-bullying, acts of kindness and rewards can be incorporated into a classroom, parenting group, or school district, where kids play in competition with others, often for meaningful but inexpensive rewards. Through interactive digital literacy for positive behavior modification, the game has welcomed the next generation of parents, teachers and children who are more responsive to digital stimuli.

For more information on The Ticket Store Game visit


Zakarin Martinez
Public Relations

buzz this

Tuesday, August 16, 2011

Digital Health Coalition Broadens Support With Formation of Digital Heath Scholars Group

Digital Health Coalition Broadens Support With Formation of Digital Heath Scholars Group

New York, NY (PRWEB) August 02, 2011The Digital Health Coalition, a nonprofit think tank dedicated to fostering innovation in online health care, today announced the formation of a new group of industry thought leaders to further support its current Advisory Board. The Digital Health Scholars, which currently number twenty-eight, will work with the Digital Health Coalition’s recently formed Advisory Board to advance the coalition’s mission of serving as the collective voice and national forum for the discussion of the current and future issues relevant to digital and electronic marketing of healthcare products and services.

Twenty-Eight Industry Thought Leaders Join the Conversation to Move Healthcare Innovation Forward

“We are very excited to be publicly announcing the formation of the coalition’s brain trust,” said Joe Farris, Co-founder and Board President. “The addition of these twenty-eight highly regarded industry representatives is in keeping with our mission to have as many perspectives as possible represented at the table.”

The following industry thought leaders join the coalition as Digital Health Scholars, further supporting a team of leading industry executives, digital marketers, legal experts, market researchers, technologists, and medical thought leaders:

  • Irene Aquino, Shire
  • Brad Aronson, Entrepreneur
  • Wendy Blackburn, InTouch Solutions
  • Bob Brooks, WEGO Health
  • Pat Choumitsky, UCB
  • Elizabeth Estes, GA Communications
  • Pete Dannenfelser, Targetbase
  • Bill Drummy, Heartbeat Ideas
  • Zoe Dunn, Hale Advisors
  • Bruce Grant, Digitas Health
  • Fabio Gratton, Ignite Health
  • Manny Hernandez, Diabetes Hands Foundation
  • Paul Ivans, Evolution Road
  • John Kamp, Coalition for Healthcare Communication
  • Jennifer Korch, Bayer
  • Jim Lefevere, Roche Diagnostics
  • Ben Lei, Genentech
  • R.J. Lewis, e-Healthcare Solutions
  • John Mack, VirSci
  • Dan McKillen, HealthDay
  • Larry Mickelberg, Havas
  • Rich Meyer, WODTC
  • Mary Modahl, QuantiaMD
  • Eileen O'Brien, Siren Interactive
  • Timothy Pantello, Tribal DDB
  • Jonathan Richman, Possible
  • Tina Sampath, Gilead
  • Jeffrey Tangney, Doximity

About Digital Health Coalition

Launched in June 2011, the Digital Health Coalition - a nonprofit corporation - seeks to promote responsible innovation via digital marketing and communications in a connected world. The Digital Health Coalition has assembled leading entrepreneurs, industry executives, patient advocates, marketers, publishers, academics, and policy makers with the ultimate goal of recommending specific actions that will improve digital communication for the healthcare industry. Their first initiative is focused on the rapidly evolving space of social media and seeks to promote a world where patients, physicians, and brands can connect, empower, and drive positive health outcomes. Individuals and companies interested in being considered for the next round of Digital Health Scholars can visit for more information and to submit an online application.

buzz this

Monday, July 25, 2011

What does the future of mHealth seem like to you?

Although the issuance of draft guidance for mobile medical applications by the FDA came as a surprise to many, experts close to the field have sensed that this summer would prove to be an important and pivotal period for the mHealth regulatory scheme. Michael Spitz discusses the implications of FDA draft guidance in his monthly mHealth Mashup. (pharmaphorum)

buzz this

Friday, April 29, 2011 Mobile Health 2011

source: Blog
By BJ Fogg , Executive Director, and Tanna Drapkin, Managing Editor, Mobile Health 2011

On May 4 and 5, over 400 people will gather at Stanford University to hear 45 experts share what really works in creating solutions to improve health behavior using mobile technology.

Hosted by Stanford University and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Mobile Health 2011 highlights real solutions for real people – practical, proven solutions. In fact, “What Really Works” is our official theme.

This is not a conference about speculation or ideas that live only in slides. That’s not helpful. This year we show what’s really working in many facets of mobile health, from early stage design to testing, from distribution to business models. And for the first time ever we’ll have a session on hacking for health (how people have used existing technologies to create quick health interventions), led by Google’s Chief Health Strategist, Dr. Roni Zeiger.

For two action-packed days, industry leaders, up-and-coming entrepreneurs, medical visionaries, and hard-working public servants will share their successes. We’ll learn from those with creative, cutting-edge approaches and from those who are working successfully within the confines of governmental security and privacy laws.

Our program features short talks, fast-paced panels, and long breaks for quality conversations. That means attendees hear from all 45 experts and get to talk with them directly. Some of the most inspiring and exciting moments of the conference happen when attendees connect. Relationships blossom, collaborations ensue, and partnerships form to continue to the critical work of providing innovative and positive health impact through the use of mobile technologies.

Mobile Health 2011 brings together grassroots, global, national, and local health organizations, health promotion professionals, mHealth solution providers, mobile vendors, innovators and researchers in mobile technology and behavior change, as well as a broad range of students and individuals doing work in this field. Our attendees are motivated and care deeply about the conference theme.

The mobile health industry continues to evolve at a dizzying pace and along with it there is the possibility to find new and different approaches to health care. At Mobile Health 2011 we highlight what is solving today’s health care problems with real results and stories. We showcase innovative and practical solutions, across a variety of sectors, which are a beacon for meaningful health care change right now. And if you're unable to attend, follow the hashtag #MH11 to see what we're up to.

buzz this

Thursday, April 21, 2011

Early Thoughts on Proposed ACO Rules

Written by Eric Dishman (3/31/11)
Source: Intel Blog

Hear ye, hear ye, read all about it! For those of you who have been waiting with bated breath (you know who you are!), the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services has just published the proposed rules and guidelines for Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) and the Medicare Shared Savings Program (SSP). You can download the 428-page document here and see the official press release here. Though, unless you are a policy or healthcare reform geek (which I guess I am becoming, frighteningly enough), you might want to wait for the inevitable summaries to be done by various consulting firms, non-profits, and individuals. I will post some of the good ones here when I see them.

These rule-makings around ACOs are a major component of the Affordable Care Act signed by President Obama last March, though most citizens and press outside of the healthcare industry have no clue what this is all about. ACOs are the primary mechanism for beginning to shift the American healthcare system from a volume-driven to a value-driven paradigm. In other words, today, the majority of healthcare is paid based on the volume of face-to-face visits, labwork, and prescriptions generated more than the value of the care provided. And these payments occur regardless of whether the treatments given (and charged for) are effective or helpful. The strategic intent of the health reform bill is to shift to a mode of payment that focuses much more on rewarding the quality of care over the volume of care.

There are three primary aims of these reform efforts (sometimes referred to as "the triple aims" or as "Berwick's triple aims" named for Don Berwick, the current Administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services). First, the goal is to provide better care for individuals. Second is to improve care for populations. And third is to lower the growth in healthcare costs and expenditures. ACOs are one of many tools to achieve these three aims, and healthcare providers and companies have been eager to see what the Secretary would propose as the specific requirements for becoming an ACO.

Basically, an ACO is a group of care providers--usually centered around primary care physicians--who commit, according to the proposed rules released today, for a minimum of three years to manage the overall care and costs of at least 5000 Medicare patients. And the ACO has to have a legal structure (though they are very flexible on the different kinds of structures permissible) that allows the organization to receive and distribute payments to all its care providers in the management of the care.

So imagine, for example, several physician practices, a hospital, and a home care agency within a particular town coming together to form an ACO to care for at least 5000 Medicare beneficiaries in that community. They would be paid what is often referred to as a "bundled" or "global payment" annually to care for all of the health needs of those patients, and they could participate in the Shared Savings Program by which they could get bonuses based on helping to reduce healthcare expenditures while boosting quality. Lest you think these providers would just ignore the needs of the sickest patients to keep their costs low and leave more shared savings in their pockets (and I should say that I have never met any clinicians in our 10+ years of fieldwork who would be so inclined--the majority are good people who went into medicine to help people), there are clear rules and data-driven quality measurement mechanisms that prevent that from happening.

I am particularly heartened to see some of the following language in the proposed rules:

• The ACO shall define processes to promote evidence-based medicine andpatient engagement, report on quality and cost measures, and coordinate care, such as through the use of telehealth, remote patient monitoring, and other such enabling technologies (p.17)

• The ACO shall demonstrate to the Secretary that it meets patient-centerednesscriteria specified by the Secretary, such as the use of patient and caregiver assessments or the use of individualized care plans (p.17)

• An ACO will manage resources carefully and respectfully. It will ensure continual waste reduction, and that every step in care adds value to the beneficiary. An ACO will be able to make investments where investments count, and move resources to meet beneficiaries' needs. Because of its capabilities with respect to prevention and anticipation, especially for chronically ill people, an ACO will be able to continually reduce its dependence on inpatient care. Instead, its patients will more likely be able to be home, where they often want to be, and, during a hospital admission, they receive assurance that their discharges will be well coordinated, and that they will not return due to avoidable complications (p. 25)

• An ACO will be proactive by reaching out to patients with reminders andadvice that can help them stay healthy and let them know when it is time for a checkup or a test (p.25)

• An ACO will collect, evaluate, and use data on health care processes andoutcomes sufficiently to measure what it achieves for beneficiaries and communities over time and use such data to improve care delivery and patient outcomes (p. 25)

• An ACO will be innovative in the service of the three-part aim of better care forindividuals, better health for populations, and lower growth in expenditures. It will draw upon the best, most advanced models of care, using modern technologies, including telehealth and electronic health records, and other tools to continually reinvent care in the modern age. It will monitor and compare its performance to other ACOs, identify and examine new processes for care improvement, and adopt those approaches that are demonstrated to be effective (p.25)

While I have several hundred more pages to go, my initial read shows some very promising directions. The rules feel very innovation-friendly and leave lots of flexibility and experimentation for communities to try different approaches to setting up ACOs. The focus on "patient engagement" shows a much-needed momentum around providing tools and expectations for patients to be a more proactive and responsible party in our own care. The explicit references to the use of telehealth and remote patient monitoring and the calling out of the need to move care to the home shows that CMS "gets it" in terms of the need to "place-shift" (a topic I bring up frequently in this blog) where care occurs away from more expensive settings like hospitals. And the requirements for incorporating and using data-driven, evidence-based tools to drive best practice care and continuous innovation/improvement will help us finally achieve a 21st century healthcare infrastructure that is scalable and competitive, internationally.

buzz this

Thursday, February 17, 2011

The 2011 Edelman Trust Barometer Survey

Source: Edelman

The 2011 Edelman Trust Barometer is the firm’s 11th annual trust and credibility survey.

The survey was produced by research frm Strategy One and consisted of 30-minute telephone interviews conducted from October 11-November 28, 2010, with the exception of France and Germany, felded January 3-13, 2011.

The 2011 Edelman Trust Barometer survey sampled 5,075 informed publics intwo age groups (25-34 and 35-64) in 23 countries. All informed publics met the following criteria: college-educated; household income in the top quartile for their age in their country; read or watch business/news media at least severaltimes a week; follow public policy issues in the news at least several times a week.

For more information, visit or call 212.704.4530.


buzz this

Sunday, February 13, 2011

The YouTube Cure: How Social Media Shapes Medical Practice

Source: Scientific American

Popular demand for an unproved surgical treatment for multiple sclerosis shows the growing power of social media to shape medical practice—for good and ill

By Katie Moisse | Tuesday, February 8, 2011

When vascular surgeon Paolo Zamboni reported in December 2009 that inflating a tiny balloon inside twisted veins in the neck provided relief from multiple sclerosis, he created quite a stir. The idea that surgically straightening crooked veins could somehow benefit a degenerative nerve problem was astounding. Physicians were skeptical. Zamboni himself concluded that his findings should be subjected to more rigorous testing. Regardless, many people with MS, which affects at least 250,000 people in the U.S., immediately began clamoring for the unproved treatment. Their demands, amplified through a wide range of social-networking platforms, soon proved impossible to resist. In the past year, for instance, hospitals in California, New York, Italy and Poland have offered the Zamboni treatment—at a cost of $10,000 or more because it is not covered by insurance.

Doctors found themselves playing catch-up every step of the way. Even before Zamboni published his results in the Journal of Vascular Surgery, a post on Patients¬ (an online patient community) boasted news of his research, useful links and a dedicated Facebook URL. Community networks traded contact information detailing who would offer the procedure and where. Before-and-after videos were posted on YouTube. Like AIDS activists of 30 years ago but armed with much more powerful communications tools, patients challenged researchers and medical centers to explain why it was taking so long to offer Zamboni’s approach. Yet most MS experts believe that undergoing the procedure at the moment is a very risky proposition.

This episode highlights a growing challenge for patients: how to temper enthusiasm for experimental therapies, now widely and effectively marketed through personal testimonials posted online, until evidence shows that the treatments are likely to do more good than harm. “You can never blame people for being excited about something that sounds like good news, especially when they have a serious disease,” says Aaron Miller, a professor of neurology at Mount Sinai School of Medicine and chief medical officer for the National MS Society. “I think these social-media sites can have a positive function in that they allow patients to discuss research and share their experiences.” But, he adds, “they have a very major risk in leading patients to embark on therapeutic courses that are not necessarily appropriate for them or haven’t been established as being scientifically valid.”

A Dangerous Game

In the case of Zamboni’s work, it is easy to see how patients might be tempted to jump the gun and seek a treatment that initially sounds exciting. After all, the study findings came from a reputable surgeon (though not an MS researcher) publishing in a respected journal. As Daniel Simon, an interventional radiologist in Edison, N.J., says of the work: “It wasn’t Bob’s Journal of MS and Autobody Repair; it was the premier journal of vascular surgery.”

It is also easy to see why racing to get treatment can be a dangerous game to play. In the first place, one study, even a well-done one, does not show that a therapy is ready for prime time. Often in medicine, early positive findings wash away later. And Zamboni himself pointed out that the study had limitations. The small trial was not randomized, double-blinded or placebo-controlled—the combination of which is considered the gold standard in clinical research. Participants also continued to take immune system–modulating therapies known to reduce symptoms.

In the case of MS, as with some other disorders, the difficulty of knowing whether a treatment that seemed to work really did have an effect in a study is compounded by the erratic nature of the disease. The most common form—relapse-remitting MS—has a variable course marked by flare-ups amid symptom-free periods. So it is difficult to know if a certain treatment actually works or was simply taken during a naturally occurring remission. Patients taking placebo have often reported substantial improvements, according to Mount Sinai’s Miller.

Furthermore, the ultimate cause of the disease remains obscure, which makes it hard to gauge the appropriateness of an intervention. Everyone agrees that MS destroys the fatty myelin sheath that enwraps many nerve fibers. Stripped of their insulation, the wires of the nervous system lose their ability to transmit the electrical signals needed for movement, sensation and vision. Most researchers assume some kind of autoimmune response, in which a person’s own defense system attacks rather than ignores the body’s own tissues, is at work.

Given that current MS treatments are a far cry from a cure and do not work for everyone, some people with MS feel there is no harm in trying something that might improve their quality of life. The answer, of course, is that it could also make their quality of life much, much worse. Any surgery carries the risk of infection, and the procedure itself can actually damage the blood vessels, making them more vulnerable to clots and aneurysms.

Without more rigorous clinical trials, it is almost impossible to weigh accurately the potential costs and benefits. The operation to straighten out and puff up crooked and collapsed veins, called venoplasty, is almost identical to cardiac angioplasty—a common treatment for diseased coronary arteries. (Side effects for both include blood clots, infections and severe internal bleeding.) After piercing through a vein in the pelvis, a spaghetti-size catheter is threaded up through a vein near the spine and into the neck, where a balloon on the catheter’s tip is inflated to pop the neck vein back to its normal shape—just like squatting in jeans that have shrunk in the wash stretches them, Simon explains.

But veins, which are more pliable than arteries, often regain their tortuous shape within months after venoplasty, requiring multiple procedures. One MS patient in the U.S. reportedly died from a brain hemorrhage while recovering, and another needed emergency surgery after a stent implanted to permanently straighten a vein dislodged and migrated to the heart.

Ready for Testing

One thing in favor of Zamboni’s approach is it has a reasonable scientific rationale, which not all potential therapies touted on the Internet have. A close look at the characteristic plaques of scar tissue that lend the disease its name shows that they typically cluster around blood vessels. And that, Zamboni says, is key. Veins are flexible and can get twisted, slowing the rate of blood flow and potentially leaving waste and compounds such as iron to accumulate in the brain. Isn’t it possible, he wonders, the buildup triggers an inflammatory response? And if the inflammation lasted long enough, it could eventually end up targeting the myelin wrapping of the nerves. A similar mechanism had been linked to myelopathies, degenerative conditions of the spinal cord, which bear a pathological semblance to MS.

That is a lot of “if’s.” But some physicians consider Zamboni’s hypothesis and treatment plausible enough to test. And the National MS Society and the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada have pledged $2.4 million over the next two years to examine the role that problems with venous circulation might play in multiple sclerosis. “There is little doubt that the intense interest in [venoplasty for MS] played a role in the decisions by the National MS Society and the Canadian MS Society to fund further research,” Miller says. Still, it is just too soon, he believes, to offer the procedure unless it is a part of a clinical trial.

A lesson from this episode, Miller says, is that it is important for neurologists and other physicians to be aware of what patients are seeing and reading online. “We can’t bury ourselves in an ivory tower and function as though [social-media sites] don’t exist,” he notes. “What our patients are thinking, we need to address. We have to be aware of it and be prepared to discuss it with them logically.” Miller says his patients almost invariably have been able to engage with him. After he explains the lack of certainty about venoplasty for MS, he observes, they usually agree with his advice to wait. Just how long they will continue to do so, however, may depend a lot on what social media push next.
buzz this

Friday, February 11, 2011

New Facebook Page Format has Implications for Pharma

authored by

Ross Fetterolf, SVP Digital Strategy

Jeremy Franz, Digital Strategy Coordinator

As if having a movie about his life nominated for an Oscar wasn’t enough excitement for 2011, Mark Zuckerberg and the Facebook gang have decided to evolve their platform once again, and the updates may leave those of us in the Pharma marketing world having to do some major updates to get our pages in compliance before this forced format change occurs on March 10th, 2011.

To help provide some visual support for these changes, we went ahead and converted the Ignite Health Digital Strategy page to the new format, and dissected these updates below. We’ll describe the changes and talk briefly about the implications for Pharma Facebook efforts from a compliance perspective or potential increased marketing opportunity.

  1. Photo Strip moves above Wall
    1. DESCRIPTION: This means that the most recent photos added by your page will be pulled into a prominent placement above the wall (similar to the recently redesigned user profile)
    2. IMPLICATION: There is now an increased importance of having photos be part of our page efforts, as they will occupy a very central area of the page. Typically Pharma pages have very few photos included outside their profile picture, everyone get your cameras out. One unique opportunity is for companies to use this strip creatively. For examples of what we mean, check out some of these interesting examples posted on mashable.

  1. Tabs Move from top panel to under Profile Picture
    1. DESCRIPTION: Tabs now move from a central navigation area under the page name, to the left area under the profile picture, with the visible number set to six
    2. IMPLICATION: This could impact how the order of safety information appears (a careful consideration for branded pages), and will also likely decrease interactions with tabs other than what appears as the primary tab for the page

  1. Profile Picture Size Reduced
    1. DESCRIPTION: The size of the profile picture used for a group have been cut down by 80 pixels (from 200 X 600 to 180 X 540)
    2. IMPLICATION: Could impact those pages that used a snippet of safety info as part of their picture to suggest that additional balanced information is available on page (a potential strategy to promote some degree of safety if posts are viewed outside of, on a mobile device perhaps)

  1. Pages can Like other Pages
    1. DESCRIPTION: Pages can now officially “like” other pages, not just follow them or include them in their links
    2. IMPLICATION: This presents an opportunity for a page to express specific affiliation with other pages (similar to a call-out on a website). Branded to un-branded linkage debates may soon be coming to Facebook…

  1. Official Page Owners
    1. DESCRIPTION: Previously, no-one knew who was responsible for creating and maintain your page, this new update provides the ability to feature page owners
    2. IMPLICATIONS: We now have the opportunity to assign a human face to brand/company efforts. Who’s your official face of social media?

The following items don’t specifically impact the page layout, but are additional regulations surrounding pages that should be noted.

  1. E-mail Notifications for User Posts/Comments
    1. DESCRIPTION: While the idea that I am notified when someone posts on my wall is common practice on individual pages, this did not occur for group pages until this update
    2. IMPLICATIONS: This update (combined with number 7 below) now opens up the potential for open comments to occur on pages, as page administrators can now be notified immediately when a user posts on the page wall or mentions a page that they like in their status update
  1. Proactively Moderate Content Posted on Page

a. DESCRIPTION: Pages can now create a “moderation blacklist” of keywords to ensure that these terms don’t appear on comments posted on your page

b. IMPLICATIONS: While there is only one current example (Psoriasis360) of open wall conversations taking place on Pharma pages, this update has the ability to make this concept feasible. Your branded page could include a “moderation blacklist” of disease terms and adverse event language to ensure that any user post would be within guidelines. Could this bring us one step closer to Pharma actually engaging in true social media?

  1. Interact Throughout Facebook as your Page
    1. DESCRIPTION: Previously pages could only communicate on their own page (through their wall), but could not communicate as a page throughout Facebook
    2. IMPLICATIONS: Theoretically, this opens up the potential for Pharma pages to communicate directly with other pages, and users interacting on those pages (i.e., adding to user comments). Imagine offering up product advice (as a brand page) to users who are commenting on a disease focused page

  1. No More Non-Official “Wall” Usage
    1. DESCRIPTION: Facebook is taking ownership of the term “wall” when used on their site, and will no longer allow users to have any application/tab that uses this language (Facebook branding policy)
    2. IMPLICATIONS: To deal with the unique implications of doing Pharma marketing on Facebook, some companies have created custom wall applications (see “our wall” on the Latisse Facebook Page) so that they could imbed safety information at the bottom of the page, technically not possible within the confines of Facebook’s official “wall.”

While this is by no means an exhaustive list of the impact that the new Facebook pages updates will have on Pharma social media efforts, it highlights a larger challenge of executing social media in our space. Simply put, we are at the mercy of Facebook and other platforms, which consistently make changes to improve the user experience or functionality, often with little or no notice to marketers who have carefully designed their experiences based on existing guidelines.

If these changes have significant impact on your Pharma Facebook page, and I suspect they might, the countdown clock starts ticking to March 10th. Can we rush to understand and process these guidelines, adjust social media policies/standards, develop solutions, get them approved through med/legal and deploy them in 4 weeks time?

Let us know your thoughts on how these changes are going to affect you, and stay tuned for some more in-depth analysis on what these updates mean for our industry.

buzz this

Thursday, February 10, 2011

ePharma Summit: ePharma 2011: This is the year of mobile

ePharma Summit: ePharma 2011: This is the year of mobile: "Search: Tried, Trusted and True—Now Tell Me What's New! • Maryann Belliveau, Google • Ann Cowan, Google Google continues to focus on sear..."

buzz this