Better regulation needed for data analytics, and more letters

Regarding the article “Data collection could stump next wave of predictive analytics," it's a very good article, capturing many instances of data analytics that illustrate the benefits and the challenges in this burgeoning area.

The challenges to data analytics, as noted, almost always involve the lack of standards—either for the data definitions themselves or for the diversity of technology used to capture the data. This lack of regularity and standardization is something data aggregators face at nearly every step of the process.

I want to recast the solution, however, away from the question of “more vs. less” government regulation. More regulation isn't what's needed. Better regulation resulting in standards that every technology company can build toward would help immensely. If those common standards arise from a widespread vendor collaborative, great. But we've waited on that for some time.

What's needed is a governmental panel that can convene the major players, listen to their advice, but still hold them accountable to reach consensus and eliminate the labyrinth of existing regulations, and the minefield of proprietary standards that make data sharing, aggregation and, ultimately, analysis so difficult.

Patrick Casey

Regarding the July 15 Vital Signs blog post "Note to doctors worried about getting paid: ACA includes cost-sharing subsidies, too,” the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act shifts more risk onto the patient's back. That's no pre-conceived notion. Credit-rating agencies are factoring it into their ratings, and they're no fools. It's one of many features of the ACA that crush access to care while expanding insurance. That's what passes as “liberal” and “progressive” in today's America.

Go figure.

Bill Baar