Things Are Changing!

The migration of TuDiabetes has begun

Content created between now and the launch of our new site on April 20th will NOT be moved to that new home, but our community values and Terms of Service still apply during this time.We are not accepting new members during this transition period. If you want to join the TuDiabetes community please send an e-mail to We will send you an invitation to join after the migration is completed.

Read about the migration and see images of the new site!

Prescription Data Used To Assess Consumers' Health "Scores"

Yesterday, The Washington Post featured an article describing what the authors called "a powerful new tool for evaluating whether to cover individual consumers: a health 'credit report' which is drawn from databases containing prescription drug records on more than 200 million Americans." Pharmaceutical industry blog Pharmalot broke the story online, but as you might imagine, that did not represent the patient perspective of this practice.

Two of the biggest providers of this type of data are Ingenix, a Minnesota-based health information services company that had $1.3 billion in sales last year, and a Wisconsin-based rival named Milliman IntelliScript.

Privacy and consumer advocates argue (with good reason) that this type of "scoring" is taking place largely outside the scrutiny of federal health regulators and lawmakers. The problem is that in most financial credit reports, there are things that contribute to a better credit score, such as repaying bills on time and not utilizing all of the credit which has been extended, as well as any negative information. But in the case of healthcare information, all that is going into the current models are the "bad" elements. None of the "good" things, such as whether HbA1c is better as a result of these pharmaceutical interventions, are factored into the score. On that basis alone, the notion of credit scoring for health is decidedly one-sided.

There is some effort to try and get a more balanced picture. For example, the Washington Post story notes that several companies are testing systems that tap into not only prescription drug information, but also data about patients held by clinical and pathological laboratories. Again, none of this data sharing is disclosed to patients.

A few years ago, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) was asked by Congress to summarize in a report describing the different steps that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is -- and is not -- taking to ensure privacy protection as part of its national health IT strategy and identifies challenges associated with protecting electronic health information exchanged within a nationwide health information network. I wrote about some of these issues a while back.

Think about the ramifications of this type of database, and the outlook is particularly dire for anyone with a chronic medical condition, which seems to be ever more people these days as medicine has moved away from actually curing people, to instead keeping them alive with chronic medical conditions which require permanent treatment with medication(s).

The practice also illustrates how electronic data gathered for one purpose can be used (or misused) and marketed for another purpose -- often without consumers' knowledge, privacy advocates say. They argue that although consumers sign consent forms, they effectively have to authorize the data release if they want insurance.

Once again, our Government hasn't been doing it's job. In February 2007, the GAO released its report which showed that overall, the Department of HHS was only in preliminary stages of protecting patient privacy, and had not yet defined an overall approach for integrating its various privacy-related initiatives or for addressing key privacy principles, nor had it defined milestones for integrating the results of these activities. The GAO identified a number of key challenges associated with protecting electronic personal health information.

The GAO report defined the key challenges as understanding and resolving legal and policy issues, such as those related to variations in states' privacy laws; ensuring that only the minimum amount of information necessary is disclosed to only those entities authorized to receive the information; ensuring individuals' rights to request access and amendments to their own health information; and implementing adequate security measures for protecting health information.

As of today, few (if any) of these issues has been addressed by Congress. But some patient advocacy groups, such as the Austin, TX-based Patient Privacy Rights Foundation, founded by Dr. Deborah Peel, have gone a long way towards effectively communicating the issues patients need to be concerned with, and have gained an important voice on Capital Hill.

However, today, if you have a dispute about your financial records, there aren't really any Federal laws which mandate certain procedures for disputing information, and provide statutory timeframes that credit reporting agencies must resolve such disputes. HIPAA has so many "covered" entities that there are gaping holes in the few protections it does provide. And with medical records (unlike financial records), there is no established process to resolve medical record disputes, or even guarantee your access to such "scores". In fact, although you have a right to your medical records, there is no legal way to challenge the information contained there! You must file a complaint with the Department of Health and Human Services, and if you're lucky, HHS may consider your request. But during the last 8 years under the Bush Administration, fewer than 30 cases have been allowed to pursue legal action, and the fines imposed for errors have been negligible.

While the Presidential Candidates have talked about these issues, neither John McCain nor Barack Obama have given any specifics on how they would help to ensure privacy and prevent abuse. In the interim, Congress continues to push down the path of electronic medical records on the elusive (and largely unsubstantiated by facts or evidence) hope that it will somehow reduce costs and improve accuracy. Most of those assertions are being driven by software and data processing companies, who spot an opportunity for themselves to make money. However, until our elected officials move to address this issue, we can probably expect that the healthcare "industry" will likely to abuse as much as they use the data without affording patients any way way to dispute misinformation or incomplete information, or provide us with a means to opt out of such "scoring" technologies.

Views: 10

Tags: 2008, Congress, GAO, Ingenix, Milliman IntelliScript, Patient, Privacy, Rights, credit scoring, health scoring, More…privacy

Comment by Toni Crebbin on August 5, 2008 at 7:43am
This cannot be a good thing. What do you suggest we do about this?
Comment by Scott Strumello on August 5, 2008 at 7:56am
The first thing we should do is join the Patient Privacy Rights Foundation, as they will send alerts and give notice of developments or legislation that we should be aware of. The other issue is to share your story as to why this issue concerns you -- legislators are influenced when people share their personal stories, so that can go a long way of convincing them why the issue concerns you and may persuade them to consider the issue when relevant legislation comes up for a vote.
Comment by Scott Strumello on August 5, 2008 at 12:01pm
The link to Patient Privacy Rights is in the article, but here it is again: They are one of the best resources on this topic.


You need to be a member of Diabetes community by Diabetes Hands Foundation: TuDiabetes to add comments!

Join Diabetes community by Diabetes Hands Foundation: TuDiabetes



From the Diabetes Hands Foundation blog...

DHF Joins Diabetes Advocacy Alliance

Diabetes Hands Foundation is incredibly honored to join the Diabetes Advocacy Alliance, an organization with the drive and potential to affect a powerful, positive impact on diabetes and healthcare policy. Diabetes Advocacy Alliance is a 20-member coalition of leading professional Read on! →

Helmsley Charitable Trust Renews Support for DHF

HELMSLEY CHARITABLE TRUST GRANTS SUPPORT TO DIABETES HANDS FOUNDATION FOR FOURTH YEAR  Funding in 2015 to support major transitions in programs and leadership at Diabetes Hands Foundation BERKELEY, CA: February 18, 2015 – The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Read on! →

Diabetes Hands Foundation Team


Melissa Lee
(Interim Executive Director, Editor, has type 1)

Manny Hernandez
(Co-Founder, has LADA)

Emily Coles (Head of Communities, has type 1)

Mila Ferrer
(EsTuDiabetes Community Manager, mother of a child with type 1)

Mike Lawson
(Head of Experience, has type 1)

Corinna Cornejo
(Director of Operations and Development, has type 2)

Desiree Johnson  (Administrative and Programs Assistant, has type 1)


Lead Administrator

Brian (bsc) (has type 2)


Lorraine (mother of type 1)
Marie B (has type 1)

DanP (has Type 1)

Gary (has type 2)

David (has type 2)


LIKE us on Facebook

Spread the word


This website is certified by Health On the Net Foundation. Click to verify. This site complies with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health information: verify here.

© 2015   A community of people touched by diabetes, run by the Diabetes Hands Foundation.

Badges  |  Contact Us  |  Terms of Service