Wednesday, December 30, 2009
There is only one 192.168.1.1
This could be a long blog post because my projected 5 minutes rapidly expanded into 5 hours, but I'll keep it short. Trouble manifested itself when after several failed attempts we reverted to old wired setup (new router not connected) and I noticed the laptop reporting being connected to a gateway at 192.168.1.1 - weird! Did I mention that the laptop runs Vista and I wanted to mock around with it as little as possible? So why would a DSL modem be at 192.168.1.1??? As usual, an extended Googling session brought clarity to this murky issue. Verizon's DSL modem - Westell 6100F in our case - turns out to be a router/modem combo! This box was acting as a router and the modem, and when new Linksys entered the picture, we had two devices - both routers! - competing for 192.168.1.1 address. No wonder things weren't working right.
I found excellent instructions on how to turn Westell's router functionality off, placing it in "bridged" mode, and effectively making it into dumb modem. Scary thoughts crossed my mind; "bridging" sounded eerily similar to "bricking," and being 400 miles away, last thing I wanted was a bricked Verizon's box! Nonetheless, after some deep breathing, we carried out the instructions. A few tense moments ensued when Westell in its new bridged mode was not connecting to the Internet. Turns out my parents particular flavor of Verizon's DSL uses PPPoE and newly dumbed-down Westell was no longer providing the necessary authentication information. Luckily, at this point configuration of Linksys proceeded smoothly and it was all too happy to take over the necessary PPPoE duties and we were online in no time.
Moral of the story? There can be only one 192.168.1.1! One for each private network, that is.
Monday, December 21, 2009
Raw Burgers and Future of Clinical Decision Making: A Ramble
Of course, same goes for information technologies. In his blog entry "Health IT: What’s the Future?" Steve Downs of Robert Wood Johnson Foundation recaps themes from a recent "Discovery and Innovation in Health IT" workshop. One presenter focused "on the need for cognitive support, showing a hockey stick graph of the number of facts that will be relevant to a given clinical decision over time (this theme reappeared several times over the two days). The number is expected to reach 1000 by 2020, while the number of facts that a human can contemplate while making a decision remains stuck at um, five." Healthcare practitioners need clinical decision support (CDS). I am surprised that such a statement could still be considered controversial...
Just like those ultrasound vein visualizing gizmos, CDS technologies are far from perfect. Thus far the CDS efforts are targeted at individual systems. The challenges are to figure out how to get/represent/manage/update/share clinical care guidelines logic that drives CDS recommendations, how to surface these recommendations to clinicians at the right place and time in a workflow-aware fashion so that they do not dismiss them outright, how to make these recommendations "actionable" to facilitate carrying out an order should a clinician decide to follow a recommendation. Necessarily, these efforts are hard - if not impossible - to generalize. These systems tend to be tightly bound to their initial implementation environments and are therefore non-interoperable in any meaningful way.
Ken Mandl and Zak Kohane proposed an idea of a plugin-friendly platform instead of a typical monolithic EHR. For this to work, the underlying clinical data must be handled in a way that abstracts it from individual applications. Alternatively, leave your monolithic applications alone and pool your data into a near-real-time repository that is application-agnostic. Ether way, if data can be separated from applications (how's that for a radical idea?), there is hope for the kind of interoperability that would result in scalable CDS. Automated processes are needed to abstract and represent domain knowledge encoded in clinical guidelines so that it can be machine-processable (consider baby-steps like HQMF); and it will probably take a miracle to figure out how to deliver CDS recommendations to practicing clinicians in such a way that they are useful. But despite these challenges, if the right incentives are in place to ensure a healthy demand for CDS technologies, we will see progress. The end-goal is the realization of the potential of healthcare IT - safe, appropriate, timely, high-quality care.
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Newton MessagePad 2100 is back
I owned this Newton since 1997 and early in its life it served as my primary computer - I did my wordprocessing, printing, e-mail, Telnet, etc. on this machine and it was fantastic. Since about 2002 I tried on and off to keep it up and running as a webserver. You can learn more about its setup when you visit. In short, the Newton is connected to my home network via Ethernet by way of a PCMCIA card.
What is different this time around? First, I did not want to rely on pre-MacOS X operating system (namely System 9) to connect to the Newton for synchronization, software uploads and backups. But I ran into a catch-22: Newton connection tools (NCX) available for MacOS X require a piece of software to be installed on the Newton. My solution was to fire up Classic mode on my old and trusty PowerBook G4, download and install original Apple's Newton Connection Utility, and use that to install the required package on the Newton. That worked flawlessly. And now I can connect to my Newton right from my MacBook Pro!
I also needed to take care of what is known as the Y2010 bug - read more about it here.
Lastly, I wanted to make sure that Newton's clock is accurate. For that I ended up using NewtSync.
There is a community of Newton enthusiasts who continue to use this incredible machine to do wonderful things. For example, this tracker shows which Newtons are online at any given moment. I am grateful to folks who continue to work on maintaining existing capabilities and developing new ones. I hope that by keeping my Newton online I am participating in some small measure in ensuring that innovations represented by this platform are recognized and appreciated.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Image files to PowerPoint slides Automatically

Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Paste unformatted text in Word 2008 for Mac via keyboard shortcut
try
set theClip to Unicode text of (the clipboard as record)
tell application 'Microsoft Word' to tell selection to type text text theClip
end try
Friday, October 30, 2009
Minute Clinic
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Russification of Macintosh
Keyboard Layout for MacOS X 10.6 "Snow Leopard" and above
Keyboard Layout for MacOS X 10.2 "Jaguar" to 10.5 "Leopard"
- CapsLock up -> Latin
- CapsLock down -> Cyrillic
Keyboard Layout for Windows
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
What's the difference between a "disc" and a "disk?"
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Create custom keyboard layouts with Ukelele | MacFixIt - CNET Reviews
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Configure built-in VPN client in Snow Leopard
- System Preferences > Network
- Click "+" and pick "VPN" under Interface
- Choose "Cisco IPSec" as VPN Type
- Enter a name of your choosing as Service Name
- Click "Create"
- Server Address - value of Host from your .pcf file
- Account name - your user name
- Password - leave blank and you will be prompted upon establishing a connection
- click Authentication Settings
- Shared Secret - either value of GroupPwd from .pcf file; if blank, take value of enc_GroupPwd and decrypt it at http://www.unix-ag.uni-kl.de/~massar/bin/cisco-decode
- Group Name - value of GroupName from .pcf file
Friday, September 4, 2009
Upgrading to Snow Leopard
sudo chmod 755 /usr/local/juniper/nc/[version number]/
sudo mkdir /Applications/Network\ Connect.app/Contents/Frameworks
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Is your network fast enough? | Business Center | Working Mac | Macworld
Saturday, August 15, 2009
My Photo in Schmap Boston Guide
Friday, July 24, 2009
Acton is great
Acton, MA is #16 on Money Magazine's "Best Places to Live" in 2009:
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag/bplive/2009/snapshots/CS2500380.html
http://www.wickedlocal.com/acton/news/x540127961/Acton-16th-in-country-on-Best-Places-to-Live-list
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Safari Microformats plugin | Download
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Front Row plugin launches Boxee
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Social networking meets home appliances
Friday, February 27, 2009
Safari 4 beta
Thursday, January 15, 2009
ICD-10 by 2013
Monday, January 12, 2009
Computational Technology for Effective Health Care: Immediate Steps and Strategic Directions
National Research Council, part of our National Academies of Science, released the report of a committee chaired by Bill Stead of Vanderbilt University. The report addresses healthcare IT from the policy perspective. Below is the author's summary of the report:
Two key statements:
- page S-2: “current efforts aimed at the nationwide deployment of HCIT will not be sufficient to achieve the vision of 21st century health care, and may even set back the cause…”
- page S-8: “… government institutions—especially the federal government—should explicitly embrace measurable health care quality improvement as the driving rationale for its health care IT adoption efforts, and should shun programs that focus on promoting adoption of specific clinical applications.”
Observations & reasoning behind the statements:
- page 1-5: “Many health care institutions, especially large ones, do spend considerable money on IT, but the IT is implemented in ways that make even small improvements hard to introduce. Even across the systems within an institution, interoperability is often awkward and slow. Information exchange with the information systems of other institutions is rare.”
- page S-3: “IT applications appear designed largely to automate tasks or business processes. They are often designed in ways that simply mimic existing paper-based forms and provide little support for the cognitive tasks of clinicians or the workflow of the people who must actually use the system. Moreover, these applications do not take advantage of human-computer interaction principles, leading to poor designs that can increase the chance of error, add to rather than reduce work, and compound the frustrations of doing required tasks. …”
- page S-4: “Health care IT was rarely used to provide clinicians with evidence-based decision support and feedback; to support data-driven process improvement; or to link clinical care and research. Health care IT rarely provided an integrative view of patient data.”
- page 3-2: “Care providers spent a great deal of time in electronically documenting what they did for patients, but these providers often said they were entering the information to comply with regulations or to defend against lawsuits, rather than because they expected someone to use it to improve clinical care.”
- page S-2: “Success … will require greater emphasis on providing cognitive support for health care providers and for patients/family caregivers … which refers to computer-based tools and systems that offer clinicians and patients assistance for thinking about and solving problems related to specific instances of health care.”
- page 3-3: “The majority of today’s health care IT is designed to support automation, with some investment in supporting connectivity, and little in support of decision support or data mining. Yet the IOM’s vision for 21st century health care expects health care IT capable of supporting cognitive activities and a learning health care system. These activities are much more about connectivity, decision support and data mining than they are about automation. The health care IT investment portfolio must be re-balanced to address this mismatch.”
- page S-8: “In focusing on the goal to be achieved, namely better and/or less expensive health care, clinicians and other providers will appropriately be drawn to IT only if, where, and when it can be shown to enable them to do their jobs more effectively. Blanket promotion of IT adoption where benefits are not clear or are over-sold—especially in a non-infrastructure context—will only waste resources and sour clinicians on the true potential of health care IT.”
What health care needs from IT that today’s systems rarely provide (pages S-3 to S-4):
- “Comprehensive data on patients’ conditions, treatments and outcomes;
- Cognitive support for health care professionals and patients to help integrate patient-specific data where possible and account for any uncertainties that remain;
- Cognitive support for health care professionals to help integrate evidence-based practice guidelines and research results into daily practice;
- Instruments and tools that allow clinicians to manage a portfolio of patients and to highlight problems as they arise both for an individual patient and within populations;
- Rapid integration of new instrumentation, biological knowledge, treatment modalities, and so on into a “learning” health care system that encourages early adoption of promising methods but also analyzes all patient experience as experimental data;
- Accommodation of growing heterogeneity of locales for provision of care, including home instrumentation for monitoring and treatment, lifestyle integration, and remote assistance; and
- Empowerment of patients and their families in effective management of health care decisions and their implementation, including personal health records, education about the individual’s conditions and options, and support of timely and focused communication with professional health care providers.”
Making progress in the near term:
Page S-5: “Principles for evolutionary change:
- Focus on improvements in care - technology is secondary.
- Seek incremental gain from incremental effort.
- Record available data so that today’s biomedical knowledge can be used to interpret the data to drive care, process improvement, and research.
- Design for human and organizational factors so that social and institutional processes will not pose barriers to appropriately taking advantage of technology.
- Support the cognitive functions of all caregivers, including health professionals, patients, and their families.”
While preparing for the long term:
Page S5: “Principles for radical change:
- Architect information and workflow systems to accommodate disruptive change.
- Archive data for subsequent re-interpretation, that is, in anticipation of future advances in biomedical knowledge that may change today’s interpretation of data and advances in computer science that may provide new ways extracting meaningful and useful knowledge from existing data stores.
- Seek and develop technologies that identify and eliminate ineffective work processes.
- Seek and develop technologies that clarify the context of data.”
And (page S-9) “Encourage interdisciplinary research in three critical areas: (a) organizational systems-level research into the design of health care systems processes and workflow; (b) computable knowledge structures and models for medicine needed to make sense of available patient data including preferences, health behaviors, and so on; and (c) human-computer interaction in a clinical context.”