<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Doctors: Your Patients Are Talking About You</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.seefirstblog.com/2009/07/28/doctors-your-patients-are-talking-about-you/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.seefirstblog.com/2009/07/28/doctors-your-patients-are-talking-about-you/?utm_source=rss&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_campaign=doctors-your-patients-are-talking-about-you</link>
	<description>Insights into the uncertain world of healthcare</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 23:43:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Evan Falchuk</title>
		<link>http://www.seefirstblog.com/2009/07/28/doctors-your-patients-are-talking-about-you/comment-page-1/#comment-236</link>
		<dc:creator>Evan Falchuk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:53:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.seefirstblog.com/?p=910#comment-236</guid>
		<description>Hi Dr. Kirsch,

First, thanks for posting here, I read your blog and am thrilled to see you reading something I wrote.  I suspect we agree on how difficult it is to measure quality - I have blogged quite a bit about that.

You may be right that satisfied patients are less likely to comment on a web site.  

But why doesn&#039;t this argue for engaging with your patients to find out how they feel about the service you give them?  And, by the same token, why not encourage those who like you to post about it on these sites?

The web isn&#039;t going away, and neither is the phenomenon of patients talking about their doctors.  Why not participate in these discussions instead of trying to stop them?

Again, thanks for your comments.

Evan</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Dr. Kirsch,</p>
<p>First, thanks for posting here, I read your blog and am thrilled to see you reading something I wrote.  I suspect we agree on how difficult it is to measure quality &#8211; I have blogged quite a bit about that.</p>
<p>You may be right that satisfied patients are less likely to comment on a web site.  </p>
<p>But why doesn&#8217;t this argue for engaging with your patients to find out how they feel about the service you give them?  And, by the same token, why not encourage those who like you to post about it on these sites?</p>
<p>The web isn&#8217;t going away, and neither is the phenomenon of patients talking about their doctors.  Why not participate in these discussions instead of trying to stop them?</p>
<p>Again, thanks for your comments.</p>
<p>Evan</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Kirsch, M.D</title>
		<link>http://www.seefirstblog.com/2009/07/28/doctors-your-patients-are-talking-about-you/comment-page-1/#comment-232</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Kirsch, M.D</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:23:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.seefirstblog.com/?p=910#comment-232</guid>
		<description>Of course, gag orders are ridiculous.  The public, however, should realized that most feedback on the web (and elsewhere) will be negative, as these are the folks who are motivated to express themselves.  So, these &#039;reviews&#039; are likely to be very skewed.  For example, for every negative review, there may be a 1000 satisfied patients who have remained silent.  Measuring medical quality is a very imprecise discipline.  More on medical quality at www.MDWhistleblower.blogspot.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of course, gag orders are ridiculous.  The public, however, should realized that most feedback on the web (and elsewhere) will be negative, as these are the folks who are motivated to express themselves.  So, these &#8216;reviews&#8217; are likely to be very skewed.  For example, for every negative review, there may be a 1000 satisfied patients who have remained silent.  Measuring medical quality is a very imprecise discipline.  More on medical quality at <a href="http://www.MDWhistleblower.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.MDWhistleblower.blogspot.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
