Mereja

Author: Ki Mae Heussner

  • Codecademy expands API lessons with Twitter, Gilt Groupe, 23andme, Box

    Wannabe developers on Codecademy are getting even more opportunities to build virtual tools. Last month, the New York-based learn-to-code startup launched a new track of lessons on using APIs (application programming interfaces) with partners like YouTube, NPR, SoundCloud and others.  On Tuesday, Codecademy said that it had added another set of lessons through partnerships with 14 companies, including Twitter, Gilt Groupe and Box.

    Codecademy screenshot Twitter APIWith the new lessons, a student could access historical tweets or tweet from her website with Twitter’s API; explore her heritage and health risk with 23andme; or build apps for scouring the latest designs on Gilt. The full list of new partners includes WePay, Twitter, Box, Evernote, Microsoft Skydrive, 23andMe, Mashape, Gilt Groupe, Ordr.in, Firebase, Easypost, Github, Mandrill (mailchimp), and Dwolla.

    “We really wanted to have a diverse set of partners that were real consumer brands – brands that people use in their everyday lives – so that we could show them that programming isn’t just abstract,” said Zach Sims, Codecademy’s co-founder and CEO.

    For students on Codecademy — whether they’re first-time programmers or more experienced developers — the lessons provide ways to create tools they can actually use and are connected to media sites, productivity apps and other consumer sites they frequent. As we’ve said before, that project-based approach is wise given all the options for learning how to code online (although others also focus lessons around specific projects). For the partners, it’s a way to get more exposure among a big and growing group of developers. The lessons are provided by the partners and Codecademy has said there is no financial relationship between the companies at this point.

    Codecademy declined to share specifics but said “many thousands” of users have taken its API classes to date.

    Image by spaxiax via Shutterstock. 

    Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
    Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

  • More growing pains for Coursera: in another slip-up, professor departs mid-course

    For the second time in less than a month, an online course on Coursera has hit a stumbling block.

    This weekend, the professor of a ten-week course on “Microeconomics for Managers,” offered through the University of California at Irvine Extension program, told students that he would be leaving the class after only its fifth week.

    “Because of disagreements over how to best to conduct this course, I’ve agreed to disengage from it, with regret,” Richard McKenzie, a professor at the University of California at Irvine’s business school, said in an open note to students. Even though McKenzie will no longer teach it, he said that the class will go on, led by course managers, including the assistant dean for distance education at UC Irvine.

    The news comes just two weeks after another slip-up for the startup, in which Coursera suspended an online class (on how to run an online class, no less) after student complaints about technical glitches and problems with the design of the class.

    Coursera and McKenzie were not immediately available for  comment. But, according to the Chronicle of Higher Education, Coursera said that McKenzie was not “removed” from his position and the startup suggested that the “disagreements” referenced in his note did not involve Coursera directly.

    Professor wasn’t accustomed to large, diverse audience

    Gary Matkin, the dean of distance education for UC Irvine, indicated that the issue was related to how McKenzie regarded the class’s more casual students, who no doubt comprised a large contingent in a class of 37,000 people.

    “Professor McKenzie is not accustomed (as few are) in teaching university-level material to an open, large, and quite diverse audience including those who were not seriously committed to achieving the learning objectives of the course or who decided not to or could to gain access to supplemental learning materials,” he told GigaOM in a statement.

    In the past year, MOOCs (massive open online courses) have been riding high, attracting millions of dollars in venture investment and thousands of online students. But the two recent Coursera incidents highlight that while the model has the potential to bring educational opportunities to millions of people, it’s still new and limited.

    As we wrote at the time, the suspended class earlier this month suggested the need for more quality control and oversight, as well as more flexibility on the part of online professors. This latest setback points to a mismatch between what traditional professors may want to create in an online class and what is currently possible.

    In several of his open notes to students (which are quite lengthy, indicating the time and consideration he appears to have given the class), McKenzie writes about commitment to the course and standards. He seemed dismayed that more students wouldn’t purchase a recommended textbook and was disappointed in the quality of the Coursera videos.

    In class of 37,000, just 2 percent engage in discussion

    More tellingly, he wrote that while he was initially impressed to learn that 37,000 students enrolled in the class, he’s learned that “enrollment count is meaningless.” In the first two weeks, less than 40 percent of students logged in to the class and only a fourth of the students had watched a single video lecture. Less than two percent of the students were actively engaged in the discussions, he said.

    “I have truly been impressed with many comments that have been posted. However, I have to worry that the value of the course to serious and active students is being undercut by students who are not a part of the course in any meaningful sense,” he wrote in a note to students in January. “I want to encourage the inactive and uninvolved students to get with the program and take the assignments seriously. If not, I suggest the course would be much improved for the serious and active students and for me if the inactive students would go ahead and dropped the course right now.”

    Given Matkin’s comments and the school’s decision to continue the course with other leadership, it seems that this was the biggest point of conflict between McKenzie and UC Irvine Extension. And it makes sense that teachers accustomed to smaller courses and an environment in which students have more uniform levels of motivation and commitment may be uncomfortable with a MOOC. While large open online classes can provide access to many more students, in their current form, they can’t demand equal accountability. For teachers like McKenzie (and his supporters in the class, as well as outside of it), accepting the “casually curious”  can be a challenge but others appreciate the MOOC’s precisely for their ability to accommodate students of varying levels of engagement.

    What’s surprising to me is that McKenzie didn’t come to the experience more prepared for the high-enrollment-low-engagement reality. In his first time teaching a MOOC, it’s understandable that he’d encounter a few surprises and have to figure things out along the way. But it makes you wonder about how Coursera brings new instructors on board and whether more preparation might be helpful.

    Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
    Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

  • As genome sequencing becomes more affordable should you do it?

    Genome sequencing is becoming more affordable than ever before – several companies in the industry say the $1,000 personal genome is just around the corner. But, even if you can afford it, is mapping your genes worth it if you don’t have a specific medical condition to consider?

    Despite the whole “knowledge is power” argument – it could help with early diagnosis and prevention or lead a doctor to better treatment options for an existing condition – sequencing skeptics raise valid concerns and questions when it comes to gene sequencing for healthy people. How precise is it? How well will consumers be able to interpret the results? Will it just lead to needless hand-wringing about conditions that people won’t be able to do to much to address or that won’t surface until much later in life?

    For now, those are questions for people with only the deepest pockets. But it won’t be long before the conversation becomes more relevant for more of us and, in the Wall Street Journal this week, two doctors weigh in with the pros and cons of the debate over whether healthy people should have their genomes sequenced.

    Dr. Atul J. Butte, division chief and associate professor at the Stanford University School of Medicine and director of the Center for Pediatric Bioinformatics at Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital in Palo Alto, Calif., takes the pro position. And Dr. Robert Green, a medical geneticist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston, argues against it.

    Even though Dr. Butte acknowledges that gene sequencing isn’t perfect, he believes the positives outweigh the negatives. He says:

    • Identifying DNA variants that are early indicators of disease can lead to early diagnoses and preventative strategies.
    • Couples planning families can learn whether they carry genetic risks for serious disorders.
    • Doctors can better figure out the most effective drugs for a patient or what to avoid
    • It can help in the diagnosis of illnesses that haven’t yet been identified.

    On the flip side, Dr. Green believes that while affordable genomic analysis opens the door to personalized disease prevention and treatment options, there are still roadblocks. For example:

    • Medically dangerous gene mutations are rare in healthy individuals but it would still be very expensive to find them – less than 2 percent of healthy people have a dangerous DNA mutation that would spur a doctor to monitoring or treatment. Assuming sequencing costs $5,000 now, it could cost $250,000 to find one person with a mutation.
    • Known mutations may or may not carry the same risk without a family history, so sequencing alone can’t always lead to action.
    • Geneticists don’t always agree on whether gene mutations are dangerous.

    When it comes to health, I tend to fall on the side of information – the more of it we have, the better off we are. And the rise of consumer-ready medical technology that gives us clearer windows into our bodies – from Fitbits (see disclosure) to the AliveCor iPhone-compatible heart monitor – is setting the stage for an era in which people are armed with even more data about their health. 23andme doesn’t do full gene sequencing but its genotyping services already let people explore their DNA for just $99.

    But as we move into this new bioinformation-filled future, it’s important to keep the skeptic’s voices in mind because gene sequencing doesn’t just have personal implications but public health consequences. One of Dr. Green’s most haunting concerns is the rise of “patients in waiting” who spend their lives in anxiety, undergoing unnecessary tests and potentially doing themselves more harm than good. But as others have noted, sequencing could take its toll on the health care system with unessential screenings and procedure, tax the patient-doctor relationship and lead to other biotethical questions.

    Disclosure: True Ventures is an investor in Fitbit and the parent company of this blog, Giga Omni Media. Om Malik, founder of Giga Omni Media, is also a venture partner at True.

    Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
    Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

  • In lawsuit with publishers, open textbook startup Boundless hits back

    In its ongoing lawsuit with three of the biggest textbook publishers, open textbook startup Boundless is down, but by no means is it out.

    Last spring, the Boston-based startup said it had raised $8 million in venture funding just as Pearson, Cengage and Macmillan Higher Education slapped it with a lawsuit alleging several violations, including copyright infringement, unfair competition and false advertising. Boundless curates and packages free online content into open textbook alternatives tailored to students’ learning needs.

    In June, the startup filed a motion to dismiss a few of the claims and said the other claims were without merit. But last month, a U.S. District Court Judge in New York denied the motion to dismiss.

    Undeterred, Boundless this week filed another response, requesting a trial by jury.

    “In our view, such legal action [by the publishers] is an attempt to stifle startups such as Boundless who are driving innovation and using the power of the Internet to help students save money and become better learners,” Boundless CEO and founder Ariel Diaz said in a statement.

    Pearson, Cengage and Macmillan Higher Education did not immediately reply to requests for comment. But in their complaint, the publishers allege that Boundless “steals the creative expression of others, willfully and blatantly violating Plaintiffs’ intellectual property rights in several of their highest profile signature textbooks.” Specifically, they say that Boundless copies “the distinctive selection, arrangement and presentation of Plaintiffs’ textbooks, along with other original text, imagery and protected expression.”

    In its defense, Boundless argues that the allegations are “overly broad and legally flawed” and that the similarities between the publishers’ textbooks and their online content are the result of covering the same facts and concepts in an order necessitated by the subject matter.

    Despite the legal battle, the startup has pushed on, adding more content, organizing content hackathons and releasing its content under Creative Commons. Boundless currently offers content for 18 subjects and claims that students at half of the colleges in the country use its content.

    Momentum behind open educational resources is growing – California and British Columbia have backed open textbook initiatives, for example.  And as awareness and the amount of low-cost or free open educational resources grows, services, like Boundless, could help professors, students and others sift through, curate and organize it. CK-12, a non-profit that curates high quality STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) content, takes another approach to aggregating and distributing open educational content. But this ongoing legal battle highlights how disruptive this movement could be to the textbook industry.

    Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
    Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

    • With $11M, Quad Learning links community colleges and top universities for cheaper degrees

      In the last year or so, we’ve seen all kinds of online learning startups emerge, from those that focus on a specific set of skills to those that offer massive web classes for free to those that partner with top universities to provide quality degree programs online.

      On Thursday, Washington, D.C.-based Quad Learning launched with $11 million to bring yet another model into the mix. Founded by Phil Bronner, an education technology investor, and Chris Romer, a former state senator of Colorado, the startup partners with community colleges to offer a web-based platform and curriculum intended to help students more successfully transfer to a four-year college.

      With tuition rates and debt loads going up, the idea is that a student could complete two years at a community college and then, with Quad Learning’s “American Honors” program, transfer to a top-200 university to finish the last two years of a bachelor’s degree program.

      “The whole focus is around college affordability,” said Bronner. “We see it as the most cost-effective way to receive a bachelor’s degree.”

      The startup, which raised funding from New Atlantic Ventures, Swan and Legend Fund, NEA, Comcast Ventures and other institutional investors, says its program can provide the opportunity to earn a bachelor’s degree at 35 to 40 percent of the cost of a traditional four-year program.

      Quad Learning is currently running two pilot programs: at the Community College of Spokane and Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana. Students who are accepted to the program attend live classes at the community college but participate in smaller discussions with peers online, as well as receive other kinds of personalized and digital content through the web-based platform. The program, Bronner said, aims to provide a more rigorous, discussion-based experience, as well as offer guidance and support so students take the classes that meet their goals and will satisfy university requirements. So far, the company said, the program has attracted high-achieving students who have chosen community college for financial or family reasons.

      To participate in the program, students pay the community college a rate that’s more than the $2,500 to $5,000 typically charged by community colleges but less than the $8,000 to $14,000 charged by in-state public universities, Bronner said. The community colleges pay Quad Learning a fee for providing the platform.

      It’s still too early to gauge the program’s success in helping students bridge community college and four-year programs – we’ll have to wait until its first cohorts of students complete the program.  But, Bronner said the program is working to strengthen relationships between community colleges and state universities and provide clarity around the classes students need to take to be able to transfer. It’s also working on forging partnerships with universities willing to accept their transfer students.

      Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
      Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

    • Flush with cash, lynda.com buys European online learning site video2brain

      One month ago, when online learning site lynda.com announced that it had raised $103 million in its first venture round since launching in 1995, we noted that the company would be well-positioned to buy up other companies in its space. On Wednesday, the Carpinteria, Calif. company said it had started doing just that.

      To reach international learners and provide courses in different languages, lynda.com said it had made its first acquisition, buyingvideo2brain, based in Graz, Austria. Launched in 2002, the company has provided online courses in web design, programming and other computer skills in multiple languages. It has more than 400,000 subscribers who access the courses via DVD or single-course downloads.

      “This is very much like lynda.com, but the lynda.com of Europe and in German, French and Spanish [and English],” said CEO Eric Robison, adding that video2brain was similarly self-funded and shared the company’s culture. Europe’s online learning market isn’t as competitive as in the U.S., but Robison said it is an active space and that video2brain was the dominant player. The company declined to share financial details but said it will add 60 people and about 1,700 new courses in the acquisition.

      For most of the last year, as more startups, like Codecademy, LearnStreet, Treehouse and others have launched to offer online classes on business and computer skills, 17-year-old lynda.com has kept a fairly low profile. But its newly-filled coffers now make it a very interesting company to watch — unlike startups just figuring out its business model, the company has been profitable for most if its existence and has figured out to how to attract a strong subscriber base of individuals, corporations and academic institutions.

      When the company announced its funding last month, Robison indicated that it would ramp up growth internationally and into new content areas. This acquisition addresses both of those goals and shows that the company isn’t biding its time. But as the company continues to eye other international regions and content areas, it could acquire even more.

      Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
      Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

    • How Obama-endorsed P-TECH high school is changing education [Q&A]

      In his State of the Union address last night, President Obama made several sweeping statements about how he’d like to improve education, but he saved a specific mention for Brooklyn, NY-based P-TECH, or Pathways in Technology Early College High School.

      Talking about the importance of aligning education with employment opportunities, he said in countries like Germany, students finish high school armed with the skills they need for the jobs that are available.

      “Now at schools like P-TECH in Brooklyn, a collaboration between New York public schools and City University of New York and IBM, students will graduate with a high school diploma and an associate’s degree in computers or engineering,” Obama said. “We need to give every American student opportunities like this.”

      Opened in September 2011, P-TECH is an IBM-backed, six-year program for New York City public high school students. At the end of the program, students get a high school degree, an associate’s degree and better chances for an entry-level position at IBM upon graduation. Even before the president’s endorsement, educators in Chicago, Maine, Massachusetts and elsewhere had started to explore the model, but given last night’s recognition you can be sure P-TECH will be getting even more attention.

      In a chat with GigaOM Wednesday, Rashid Davis, P-TECH’s founding principal, talked about what makes P-TECH work, how it could be replicated and what could make the model even better.

      GigaOM: As we write about frequently on GigaOM, the digital economy is creating the demand for new skills and new ways of learning those skills. From your perspective, what’s driving the momentum behind P-Tech and new schools like it? 

      Davis: I think, really, it’s industry coming forward and saying these are the skills that are important and working with secondary and post-secondary institutions to say how do we make sure those gaps and skills are filled.

      GigaOM: Corporations have worked with educators in the past but what really distinguishes P-Tech’s model?

      Davis: Every student has a mentor from IBM and the expectation is for students to complete the post-secondary credential, not just earn a college credit. And it’s an open-admission school that starts in grade 9. We’re not taking students that have taken an academic test or have been academically screened for this particular model. 

      GigaOM: Why is it a model that can succeed in different cities and school districts across the country?

      Davis: Because you’re talking about the diversification that’s necessary – how do you get people who are underrepresented and you’re broadening the applicant pool for areas where jobs are not getting filled. … It can also be replicated for other industries – not just IT. It could be manufacturing, it could be fashion, it could be sports.  It really depends on the industry and the skills that you want to address and the post-secondary institutions that could give you that credential.

      GigaOM: The first wave of students will graduate in 2017, but what early indicators can you look at to evaluate how the program is doing and measure success?

      Davis: There are some students that may complete this program in four years or five years. But so far, we have 103 students who started with us in grade 9 last year and, of those, 62 are enrolled in at least one college course. … It’s important to understand that this an open-admissions population, with many students who may be the first in their family to even graduate from high school. I don’t want people to try to compare these students to traditional students who may have a different economic background or different levels of support and then [give less value to] measures of success from not really understanding [that difference].

      GigaOM: What kinds of challenges have you encountered so far? 

      Davis: The challenge is to have 13- and 14-year-olds who may have thought of themselves as students who have not done well, and now we’re telling them that they’re college students from day one. That becomes a challenge because students need to not only make a mental shift, but change their habits so they can… believe in themselves and be consistent in their outcomes.

      GigaOM: How do you support them in that shift?

      Davis: In addition to every student having a professional IBM mentor, every teacher mentors students and we’re having students adopt each other.

      GigaOM: If you could do more to make this model a success, what would it be?

      Davis: I would add a boarding component for six months in the summer and I’d try to find a way to house the students for the last two years… 85 percent of my students are on free or reduced lunch and they’re not coming from within walking distance of the community. And it’s important to remember that 76 percent of our population are boys, with 73 percent being young men of color. Every day they go into their communities and we’re at risk of losing them or having them sidetracked to other realities. With boarding, I think it’s essential to make sure we can continue the learning.

      GigaOM: Aside from schools like yours, what else would you like to see in NYC schools?

      Davis: I’d like to see every high school in NYC attached to one of the [City University of New York] schools to allow this same opportunity to exist for all NYC public school students. We know it’s hard for students to actually get meaningful employment – we need to start off by saying that it’s important for every NYC student who graduates from public school leaves with a post-secondary credential or associates degree.

      GigaOM: And, as other schools around the country create P-Tech like schools, what would you advise them?

      Davis: They should keep in mind: how do we move quicker? How do we really think of the ways that postsecondary schools could be dual-credentialed for students to actually let them do more while they’re younger and before life gets in the way?

      Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
      Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

    • A Twitter chat: How technology in schools can help bridge the skills gap

      The digital economy is demanding new skills from workers, but too many students finish high school unprepared for the future. To explore how emerging technology and new approaches to education could address that, this week, I moderated a Twitter chat with McGraw-Hill SVP Jeff Livingston and Rashid Davis, principal of New York’s Pathways in Technology Early College High School.  You can check out a Storify of the conversation here, or see an abridged version of the conversation below.

      We started the Twitter chat with some context. McGraw-Hill’s svp of College and Career Readiness Jeff Livingston pointed out that the topic is especially relevant now because, in addition to the changing economy, the high school diploma has lost so much of its value.

      At the same time, we’re seeing the emergence of all kinds of new technologies – like adaptive learning platforms and online courses.

      Science and technology skills are more in demand than ever before, but there are mismatches between what employers need and what students are learning.

      This didn’t come up explicitly in the Twitter chat, but it’s worth noting that a few recent surveys have highlighted this gap. A McKinsey survey in December found that only 42 percent of employers think students are prepared for work while 72 percent of educational institutions do. In a recent GE survey, C-suite execs said linking schools with business was one of their top priorities. Davis’ Pathways in Technology Early College High School, in New York, is one example of how that can happen. The school is backed by IBM and in six years, students get a high school degree, an associate’s degree and better chances for an entry-level position at IBM when they graduate. Chicago offers similar schools and educators in Maine, Massachusetts and elsewhere are also looking at the model.

      As the economy goes digital and the Internet becomes an even bigger part of lives, those with STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) backgrounds will be well-positioned to succeed…

      But some pointed out that it’s important to remember that a STEM education doesn’t necessarily guarantee employment:

      … And others emphasized that focusing on STEM subjects shouldn’t come at the cost of learning “softer” skills.

      In addition to developing a more relevant knowledge base, some tweeted that students need more experience in the workplace and connections with working professionals. (Another little side note: more startups — like Careerosity, Mytonomy and ModernGuild — are trying different approaches to this.)

      The chat also highlighted how new adaptive learning technology and analytics platforms could personalize education so that schools can better assess what students actually know, not just how much time they spent in a classroom.

      That could potentially lead to new ways of structuring schools and organizing classrooms…

      As schools and families explore these different options there will doubtlessly be plenty more debate but Livingston and Davis emphasized that students can start by creating a plan.

      Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
      Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

    • Health tech’s monthly checkup: investment nearly tripled in January (infographic)

      Last year may have been a good year for health tech funding — but 2013 is shaping up to be even better.

      The amount of funding put toward health tech companies in January was up 172 percent over the same time last year, according to StartUp Health Insights, the database run by New York-based StartUp Health Academy, Investors poured nearly $272 million into 47 deals, with the biggest deal topping $45 million.

      Here is a graphical snapshot of some of the January highlights:

      startuphealth-v2

      Key takeaways:

      • About a third of the funding went to seed stage and A-round companies, and more incubators and strategic investors are moving in at the early rounds — not just venture capitalists, who traditionally invest early on.
      • The hottest sectors were data and analytics, mobile health and telehealth — all areas that are attracting attention as industry players look for ways to reduce costs, engage consumers and show outcomes.
      • The most active investor was the Merck Global Health Innovation Fund, which made three investments in January.
      • On average, Series D rounds are 154 percent larger than they were at the same time last year, which StartUp Health says is consistent with a recent trend of many venture capitalists in the sector taking less risk by investing at later stages.

      What new trends will we see in 2013? DNA laser printing and more sophisticated connected sensor technology, for example, are both just beginning to gain traction, saidUnity Stoakes, president and co-founder of StartUp Health. “One interesting thing to watch for will be the sources of funding for these early stage companies as capital shifts from life sciences and biotech to health tech and strategic investors become more active,” he said.

      Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
      Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

    • Coursera classes for college credit? Five online courses approved for credit equivalency

      Massive open online classes are moving ever closer to legitimacy. Last month, Udacity announced a partnership with San Jose State University to pilot three online classes for college credit. And on Wednesday, Coursera is set to announce that five of its courses have won approval from the American Council on Education (ACE) for credit equivalency.

      That doesn’t mean students of those courses will be guaranteed credit by traditional universities — institutions have the option to accept or decline the credit — but it indicates that the courses meet ACE’s standards. And, importantly, it creates the opportunity for Coursera students to not just use online classes to burnish a resume, but to potentially earn a degree.

      When Coursera first announced its decision to seek ACE approval back in November, Coursera co-founder Andrew Ng told GigaOM:

      “Ever since we launched Coursera, we’ve known that university degrees are important. We wanted a more systematic way for students to earn academic credit… This is just a step in that direction.”

      Over the past few months, in addition to Udacity’s San Jose State partnership, a few institutions, including the University of Helsinki and the University of Washington, have unilaterally announced that they would award credit for some Coursera courses.

      But the ACE recommendations mean Coursera classes could be eligible for credit at potentially 2,000 U.S. colleges and universities.

      To be eligible for the credit, students need to sign up for the course’s Signature Track, which requires them to take extra steps to validate their identity, and then take an online proctored exam (through third-party ProctorU). The Signature Track costs $60 to $90 and the proctored exam costs $30 to $99.

      For now, just five courses have been approved for credit equivalency, four for college credit and one for vocational credit: Pre-Calculus from the University of California, Irvine; Introduction to Genetics and Evolution from Duke University; Bioelectricity: A Quantitative Approach from Duke University; Calculus: Single Variable from the University of Pennsylvania and Algebra from the University of California, Irvine.

      Momentum is certainly building behind massive open online classes (MOOCs). But it’s important to remember, as we saw this week when Coursera was forced to suspend a class for the first time after complaints about technical glitches and the design of the class, they’re not without their limitations and are still very much evolving.

      Image by jcjgphotography via Shutterstock.

      Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
      Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

    • Fresh from primetime cameo, Sotera Wireless’ remote patient monitoring tech nabs $14.8M

      If you watched NBC’s Rock Center a couple of weeks ago, you might have noticed a segment featuring Dr. Eric Topol, a longtime cardiologist, author of “The Creative Destruction of Medicine” and one of the leading voices in digital medicine.

      In the segment, he showed off a futuristic flip-phone-sized touchscreen device, worn on the wrist, that helps doctors keep tabs on their patients from afar. The device, called the VisiMobile monitor, tracks a patient’s blood pressure, heart rate, respiration rate and other indicators, and lets doctors check in from wherever they might be via PC, tablet or smartphone.

      On Wednesday, Sotera Wireless, the San Diego-based company behind the VisiMobile technology, announced that it had raised an additional $14.8 million. The company, which changed its name from Triage Wireless in 2009, last year won FDA clearance for its VisiMobile technology.  In addition to the wrist monitor, the system includes sensors for the chest and thumb and a blood cuff monitor. It can connect to a hospital’s existing infrastructure via secure Wi-Fi to let doctors and nurses keep closer tabs on more patients within a hospital or it can be used to let doctors monitor recently discharged patients.

      As health providers prepare to give care to more patients and as hospitals face more pressure to lower readmission rates, systems like this, as well as other tele-health technology, could become increasingly valuable.

      In a statement, Sotera Wireless CEO Tom Watlington, said the new funding would go towards commercialization, clinical development and making the technology available to more than 5,000 hospitals across the country. Safeguard Scientifics, a holding company that provides capital and support to health care and technology companies, said it contributed $1.33 million. Other investors included new funder Delphi Ventures, as well as existing funders Sanderling Ventures, Qualcomm Ventures, EDBI, Intel Capital, Cerner Capital and West Health Investment Fund.

      You can see a video of Dr. Topol talking about the technology on Rock Center below:

      Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
      Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

    • Health startup Keas ‘reboots’ to turn your officemates into virtual gym buddies

      Keas, the health startup launched by former head of Google Health Adam Bosworth, is changing things up once again. Founded in 2009 as a kind of a “Mint.com for health,” the company later pivoted into a gamified employee wellness program.

      On Tuesday, the company said it was evolving once more with a new management team and product platform meant to make Keas feel even less like traditional enterprise software and more like a consumer product that just happens to be distributed in the workplace.

      “We’re going from a health IT team to one that’s an engagement team, both in terms of the product and the market,” said CEO Josh Stevens, describing the change as a “reboot.” “We’re at the crossroads of the consumerization of health. [Keas] feels like a consumer app but the best place to get traction from the app is at work.”

      Over the past few months, the company has added not just Stevens (see disclosure below), but new executives in product, sales, marketing and business development. It’s also been developing a new version of its product, Keas 360/365, released today, that the company says is a more comprehensive, open and sticky social network centered around health and wellness.

      The goal, said Stevens, is to give people a social and fun framework for engaging in health activities so that they can ultimately improve their own health – and their companies’ bottom line.

      keasThrough Keas’ social network, HR executives can spread the word about flu shot programs and other health initiatives and employees can share posts about their runs and healthy habits. All users are broken up into small teams so that light peer pressure pushes each member into more engagement.

      With the new version, users complete a brief assessment to receive personalized goals and objectives. To keep them engaged and help them reach those goals, the program offers fitness challenges, games polls and other kinds of content. The latest platform is also available on mobile and integrates with third-party apps and devices, so that a user could choose to have her Fitbit automatically post her daily activity in her newsfeed, for example.

      As healthcare costs climb, Keas’ pitch to employers is that promoting employee health can lead to higher productivity and ultimately lower health expenses. For employees, the program is positioned as a way to reach their health goals as well as get rewarded for their activities – extra steps logged on your Fitbit, getting the flu shot and taking other healthy steps could mean discounts on health insurance or extra credits in your flexible spending account.

      As we’ve covered before, rising health costs and new incentives in the Affordable Care Act are giving employers new reasons to consider corporate wellness programs. And new technology, such as Fitbits and Nike Fuelbands that track activity are providing new ways to quantifiably monitor employee behavior and track results.  In similar ways, ShapeUp and PUSH Wellness also target employers with digital wellness programs and companies like Everymove partner with health plans to incentive healthy behavior change.

      Since launching, Keas has raised $17.5 million. In 2012, it said it increased its registered users by 282 percent and added new enterprise clients like The Cheesecake Factory, Mountain State Health Alliance, BAE Systems, Pella, and British Telecom.

      “If you’re going to have a bite out of the apple of solving the health care crisis in the U.S., it has to start at work because that’s where most Americans spend most of their time eating and where they spend most of their time living,” Stevens said.

      Keas CEO Josh Stevens is on GigaOM’s board of advisors.

      Image by dotshock via Shutterstock.

      Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
      Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

    • East coast ed tech innovation ramps up with new accelerators in New York and Boston

      Between their many universities, research centers and publishing companies, New York and Boston are already considered leaders in education, but two new startup accelerators want to make their cities as prominent in education technology.

      On Friday, Boston-based LearnLaunchX made its debut, announcing that it would kick off its first session in June. And, next week, Socratic Labs, an accelerator program in New York, will officially launch with its inaugural class of startups. Along the lines of other incubators, the two programs each give accepted startups a small amount of capital ($15,000 to $25,000 at Socratic Labs and $18,000 at LearnLaunchX) in exchange for some equity, as well as mentorship, guidance, space and other benefits.

      In the past few years, accelerator programs have become more ubiquitous across the country, as have those in specific verticals. General accelerator programs like TechStars and Y Combinator, which backed startups Codecademy and Clever, are open to ed tech startups. But over the last few years, ed tech-specific incubators, including Silicon Valley-based Imagine K12 and 4.0 Schools in New Orleans (which has a slightly different model), have emerged to support education entrepreneurs exclusively.

      While those programs focus on k-12 education, both LearnLaunchX and Socratic Labs say they are focused on learners of all kinds and both argue that their local networks of educators, school districts, institutions and corporations will give their startups an edge.

      “We expect to see quite a lot of involvement from industry in helping set up beta tests for our cohort,” said Jean Hammond, a LearnLaunchX co-founder and Boston angel investor. “We have lots and lots of publishers that need to acquire to survive and we have amazing college and university resources, as well as a general entrepreneurship community.”

      But New York is also a particularly interesting place for education right now.  Not only is it home to top publishers, media companies and a strong startup community, it has the country’s largest k-12 district and a dedicated subset of schools focused on experimenting with new technologies, through the iZone project.

      “We have this awesome convergence of factors,” said Heather Gilchrist, a founding partner of Socratic Labs who previously worked at ed tech company Grockit,. “There’s a different chemistry in the city.”

      Both programs plan to draw from their local communities, as well as startups from elsewhere.  But now that ed tech entrepreneurs have more options than ever, it will be interesting to see how the different classes shake out. ImagineK12, with its Palo Alto location and Silicon Valley veteran founders, could attract more consumer web-inspired companies, while the East Coast accelerators could appeal to those who want to sync up more closely with school districts and institutions. But obviously, aside from their geography, the programs differ in terms of the backgrounds of their founders, the networks of people they provide access to and their structure and curriculum. As ed tech founders assess those options, they’ll just need to weigh those factors against their priorities and goals.

      Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
      Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

    • NYC-backed health startup lab wants to turn academics into entrepreneurs

      The Bio & Health Tech Entrepreneurship Lab, a new startup program supported by the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC), is betting that it can turn a group of mostly science-oriented academics and researchers into business-savvy entrepreneurs.

      The program which launched at the end of last year, this week announced the members of its inaugural class, selecting 20 startups from an applicant pool of 78. Out of the group, just one startup is not affiliated with a university or teaching hospital in New York.

      Mary Howard, program manager for the Bio & Health Tech Entrepreneurship Lab (ELabNYC), said the startups take on a range of problems from drug discovery to devices to health IT, although bioinformatics and diagnostics are particularly well represented.

      Unlike other health-focused startup programs, ELabNYC doesn’t provide funding or space and it’s focused on much earlier-stage companies – in this class, more than half don’t even have websites and many have yet to incorporate. The program is also less selective than other health-specific startup accelerators that often take just three percent of applicants.

      But its audience and goals are different – it hopes to bridge the city’s academic and entrepreneurial communities and help science researchers and engineers with little business knowledge commercialize their work. The six-month program will provide participants with coaching, pitch preparation, mentorship and other activities meant to connect founders with the local network of investors and entrepreneurs in healthcare.

      Universities are increasingly supporting on-campus innovation through incubator-style programs, but those tend to focus on student entrepreneurs. Howard said ELabNYC aims to support researchers whose institutions may not have the staff or resources to help academics interested in improving their understanding of business or expand their professional networks.

      “What was very encouraging was the level of participation by the universities in supporting the program by tapping into their communities,” said Eric Vieira, the program’s bio science practice leader. “It shows that pieces are falling into place and the universities would like to see these kinds of technology developed.”

      Here are the lab’s new class of startups (language from ELabNYC):

      Paul Scheid and Ashish Agarwal: Solvuu is a big-data management and analysis software for genomics. By applying a novel software engineering methodology the platform will advance biological research and healthcare.

      Eliot Dow: [We use a] combination of human crowd sourcing and digital image analysis [to] permit scientists to routinely analyze the brain’s neural wiring.

      Alexander Bisignano: Recombine is comprehensive, cost-effective genetic test for couples looking to conceive. We provide an all inclusive genetic testing service from sample collection and DNA analysis all the way through to genetic counseling. It is genetic testing, simplified.

      Neal Paragas: Our molecular imaging animal model and image processing algorithms allow for the non-invasive, real-time visualization of efficacy and safety studies in models of human disease. 

      Scott Trocchia: [We use] nanoscale solid-state device design, circuit design and biochemistry to explore single-molecule bio-electronic transduction in a unique fashion by leveraging field-effect detection.

      Roger Altman & Scott Blanchard: Lumidyne Technologies aims to bring next-generation fluorescent probes, which exhibit superior brightness and stability over all analogous commercially available reagents,  to the commercial market.

      Mikail Kamal & Jason Rosenberg: [We provide a] low-cost and low-tech emergency obstetrics device for managing PPH in low resources settings.

      Kate Rochlin: ImmunovENT re-invents allergy diagnostics with the Local Allergy Mucosal Brush (LAMB) Test, which identifies local antigen-specific igE not found by skin or blood testing.

      Michael Khalil: [We use] a novel optical tomography imaging system to diagnose and monitor peripheral arterial disease; we aim to reduce the number of diabetic foot amputations.

      Joseph Landolina & Isaac Miller: [We] created a gel that instantly stops bleeding; is inexpensively produced and facilitates faster healing. Our goal is to improve the quality of wound care.

      Tian Liu: [We develop] image processing software to assist neurosurgeons performing image guided surgery.

      Suzanne Maher: [We created a] non-degradable synthetic implant designed to mechanically function in a similar way to the native tissue, while also enabling robust fixation at the site of implantation.

      Sudarshana Purkavastha: [We use] oxytocin analogues as next generation peptide drugs to treat obesity/type 2 diabetes with improved efficacy and eliminating negative side effects.

      Ophir Gaathon: Diamond Nanotechnologies develops fluorescent biomarkers for super resolution sensing and imaging at the single molecular level.

      Arevik Mosoian, Luca Gusella, Elena Fedorov: SkinAxis develops a platform for drug and cosmetic active ingredient discovery that allows identification and validation of skin molecular targets under physiologically relevant conditions.

      Yu Zhang: [We use] a novel synthetic Curcuminoid as a wound healing treatment product.

      Jason Dictenberg: [We focus on] cryopreservation for primary cell culture commercialization.

      Ke Cheng & Sina Basir: HistoWiz is a histopathology service company that process mouse tissue samples and digitalizes the result for cancer researchers in academia and pharma.

      Rodney Agayan & Mark Punyanitya: The Image Reading Center interactive training platform enables academic investigators and industry scientists to improve the overall quality of clinical trials.

      Jonathan Dick: mHealth Solutions leverages mobile technology to improve care to high-risk patients by providing decision support while simultaneously engaging patients through their mobile phones.

      Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
      Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

    • TechStars takes Chicago, merges with Excelerate Labs incubator program

      It’s been a big week for Boulder, Colo.-based TechStars. Just yesterday, the accelerator program said that it had chosen a new managing director for its New York City program. And on Friday, founder and CEO David Cohen announced that the company is setting up TechStars Chicago, by partnering with the local incubator Excelerate Labs.

      Led by a group of entrepreneurs and venture capitalists, including SurePayroll founder Troy Henikoff, OkCupid founder Sam Yagan, Sandbox Industries’ Nick Rosa and New World Ventures’ Adam Koopersmith, Excelerator Labs launched three years ago and has established itself as a prominent part of Chicago’s growing startup community. In the past three years, the program said its 30 companies have raised a total of $30 million. But by becoming part of the national TechStars program, it could help elevate the local community and give founders access to TechStars’ larger network of mentors and entrepreneurs.

      In a blog post, Cohen said he and TechStars cofounder Brad Feld had advised Henikoff and Yagan and had mentored companies in Excelerate Labs’ classes. He also said that he had personally invested in three Excelerate startups.

      “As TechStars has expanded into new cities, we’ve always started our programs from scratch. But Excelerate made us think differently,” Cohen wrote. “We were so impressed with what they’ve built that we asked them to join forces with us and turn Excelerate Labs into TechStars Chicago. TechStars and Excelerate have always been kindred spirits: we both put entrepreneurs first and believe in the power of mentorship.”

      Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
      Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

    • BetterDoctor takes on ZocDoc with streamlined doctor discovery app, now on iOS

      ZocDoc may be the big kahuna when it comes to booking a doctor ASAP but BetterDoctor believes it can make a name for itself as a service for finding a quality doctor in general.

      Launched by the former head of Nokia’s App Studios after a frustrating personal run-in with the health care system, the startup provides easy access to a searchable database of about 600,000 doctors nationwide.  It launched on the web and with a mobile optimized last fall but on Thursday released its first mobile app for the iPhone.

      “What we focus on is the discovery problem – it’s not always about needing to find a doctor today,” said founder and CEO Ari Tulla, referencing ZocDoc. And, he added, that when it comes to mobile, “If I learned anything [at Nokia], it’s that mobile has to be very simple – there has to be one thing that it does well.”

      For BetterDoctor, he hopes that one thing is helping people find a good doctor in as little time as possible.

      BetterDoctorTo streamline the process, the service only helps people search for a general practitioners, dentists, pediatricians, OB/GYNs and optometrists (as opposed to the endless array of specialists available on ZocDoc and other sites).  And it only lets people search by location and insurance company. The service is free to consumers but earns revenue through lead generation.

      Similar to ZodDoc, the app then returns a list of relevant doctors, with biographical and contact information, specialties, affiliations and reviews (supplied by Yelp). But Tulla said the company pays special attention to evaluating doctor quality. While other doctor discovery marketplaces may give prime real estate to those willing to pay for it regardless of how good they are, he said BetterDoctor uses big data and machine learning algorithms to attempt to validate each doctor.

      In addition to the basics – a doctor’s education, board certification and experience – the startup looks at patient reviews, malpractice history and referral data that can indicate whom other doctors hold in high esteem.  Doctors that meet all of its criteria surface most visibly in searches and get a special designation as a validated physician; doctors that have don’t pass malpractice screenings or have other issues end up closer to the bottom of the list.

      BetterDoctor is definitely not without competition – besides ZocDoc, companies like HealthTap, PokitDok, HealthInReach and others fall somewhere on the spectrum in the doctor discovery space. But I like their data-driven approach to validating doctors (HealthTap also attempts to rank doctors by quality although it uses slightly different variables), and I appreciate their stance on reviews. Tulla said patient reviews are only a part of how doctors are ranked because “consumer reviews are tricky in healthcare.”  Studies have shown that on most doctor review sites, there aren’t enough reviews for them to be reliable and that they tend to skew positive.

      Unlike many doctor discovery sites, BetterDoctor doesn’t let patients leave reviews and comments of their own because Tulla said they don’t yet have a way to verify that a patient actually met with the doctor.  But he indicated that it’s something they could roll out in the future.

      Tulla declined to share too many details on user activity or revenue, but said the company, which has raised about $525,000 in seed funding so far, has been used by hundreds of thousands of people.

      Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
      Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

    • GAIN Fitness unbundles the exercise class with new platform – and new funding

      Plenty of new apps promise to put a personal trainer in your pocket, but GAIN Fitness doesn’t just want to offer quality workouts, it plans to provide a whole marketplace of them.

      With its new strategy, GAIN won’t focus on promoting its own line of exercise apps but will partner with other fitness experts, training centers and franchises to provide the underlying technology for their content.  For example, it’s created a basketball app with the Peak Performance Project in Santa Barbara, Calif. and a weight-training app with DF Keifer, a nutrition and training expert. Soon, the workouts won’t just be available as in-app purchases, but as stand-alone apps in Apple’s app store.

      Since launching in 2011, the company said it’s logged about two million users (on the Web and iOS) and about 600,000 downloads.  From within its iPhone app, yogis, weight-lifters and other exercise enthusiasts have been able to buy (for $1 to $7) workouts that include audio coaching from trainers, animated illustrations and video, personalization options and progress tracking.

      But after two years of offering its workouts under one umbrella, founder and CEO Nick Gammell said GAIN Fitness plans to take a platform approach.

      “Fitness is an industry of niches,” said Gammell, who formerly worked at Google. And while GAIN’s initial course was to aggregate the different markets, “in the past year, we’ve focused on creating a tech platform and features that can be useful across different types of fitness instruction,” Gammell continued.

      In addition to launching the new marketplace on its website, Gammell also said the company had raised $550,000 on top of the $650,000 round it had previously announced, bringing its total amount raised to $1.2 million. Funders include InterWest Partners, former Square COO Keith Rabois and Practice Fusion co-founder Matthew Douglass.

      GAIN PACK

      GAIN’s pitch to potential partners is that with its technology, it can provide a higher quality app in less time and with more exposure. Each deal is different, Gammell said, but they all include a revenue share and co-marketing.  So far, it’s attracted five partners but it plans to release a new app every month going forward.  And its pricing strategy could entice partners reluctant to cheapen their products in an App marketplace that favors apps in the $1 to $2 range.

      Instead of charging users a subscription fee or a higher flat fee, GAIN lets people pick and choose the kinds of exercises they want, a la carte. For example, aspiring yogis can pay $6.99 for a basic yoga class and then purchase additional $3.99 “packs” on balance, strength or focus areas.  Strength trainers can purchase packs that target their glutes or abs, or push them to a higher level.

      For users who want a convenient way to exercise while traveling or coping with a busy schedule, GAIN provides the ability to buy and customize the content most relevant to their level and goals. And for companies and franchises that have made their names with pricey offline classes or cheaper (but still potentially pricey) DVDs, the company’s approach could be a way to reach a greater audience.

      GAIN will have to prove to consumers that its paid apps are better than other free and lower-priced options. And it will need to convince more “celebrities,” popular trainers and organizations to join its site. That could be a challenge if companies have deep enough pockets and think their brand is big enough to stand alone. But given the rise of quantified self-type tracking devices, like the Fitbit and Nike Fuelband, it’s clear that consumer interest in fitness-related technology is growing. It seems only natural that they’d have a strong appetite for quality mobile fitness content as well.

    • Docs flock to private social networks amid tighter laws; 20 pct of U.S. doctors join Doximity

      Professionals in every field need to be careful about the messages they send out over social media and email – indeed, over the past few years, we’ve seen plenty of stories (even slideshows full of them) of people fired for posts on Facebook and Twitter.

      But doctors – who must comply with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (or HIPAA) – are in an especially sensitive situation.  For them, security slip-ups can lead to hefty fines. And, over the past few years, as more health information has gone digital, the government has tightened privacy laws by, for example, increasing maximum fines, cracking down on more violations and penalizing organizations for smaller breaches.

      That’s creating a high-pressure environment for doctors – but also growing opportunity for physician-only social networks that promise doctors a secure way to collaborate and communicate with peers.  Back in September, Doximity, a kind of “LinkedIn for doctors,” said that it had crossed the 100,000-member mark less than two years after launching. On Monday, the San Mateo, Calif.-based company announced that it had reached another milestone, attracting 125,000 doctors, or one out of every five doctors in the U.S. Registered users include those who have created a profile and, on average, share more than a dozen professional milestones (including their residencies, awards and articles). Of its 125,000 users, the company said, about one-third are active on the site each month.

      Jeff Tangney, the company’s CEO, said Doximity’s growth is even double that of Epocrates, the popular mobile health company he co-founded in the late 1990s (and that was recently acquired by athenahealth). He attributes part of its rise to the quality of the network and the content – the company made a point of launching with thought leaders from top hospitals like Columbia, Stanford, UCSF and the Univ. of Pennsylvania.  But he said that the tightening privacy laws are also giving the site a boost.

      “Privacy and HIPAA seem to be a real tailwind for us,” Tangney said. “The law, while having more teeth, has become part of the doctors’ consciousness that they need to be more careful about sending that message or email.”

      Earlier this month, the Department of Health and Human Services said it made the most “sweeping changes” to HIPAA, raising the maximum penalty for negligence, strengthening data breach notification requirements and expanding the pool of parties who must comply with the law.

      But even before that, Tangney said, doctors were becoming more aware of rising penalties for security violations. In 2011, an emergency room doctor in Rhode Island was fired for posting information about a patient on Facebook. (Even though the doctor never mentioned the patient’s name, the hospital board decided her post was too revealing.) This month, a hospice in Idaho became the first health care organization to be fined ($50,000) for a breach affecting fewer than 500 individuals.

      As doctors look for secure social networking options, Doximity, however, isn’t their only option. For example, QuantiaMD, founded in 2008, says 160,000 doctors (or a quarter of the country’s physicians) use its site; Sermo, launched in 2005, says 20 percent of doctors are part of its community; and forMD, a new site backed by accelerator Blueprint Health, is throwing its hat into the ring.

      But not only does Doximity provide a secure and real-name network of doctors (all members are authenticated), it opened up an API in October to let developers and medical services plug into its platform. Tangney said 15 companies are using the API and, going forward, it will be interesting to see what kinds of tools and services can be built on top of the network.

      To date, company has raised just under $28 million from investors including Morganthaler Ventures, Emergence Capital Partners and Interwest Partners.

    • 70 percent of Americans track their health, but most go low-tech

      It may just be early adopter tech types who log every step they take or calorie they burn using Fitbits, Nike Fuelbands, and other devices, but that hardly means they’re the only ones who track their health.

      About 7 in 10 American adults told the Pew Internet & American Life Project that they track a health indicator like weight, diet, exercise or a symptom. But despite growing buzz around the “quantified self” movement and the explosion of gadgets and apps that help people measure and analyze everything from their activity and sleep patterns to blood glucose levels and other vital signs, just a small slice of health trackers rely on high tech devices.

      Indeed, according to the study released Monday, which was conducted via telephone and included 3,014 adults, nearly half of the trackers don’t use any kind of external tool at all.

      Pew reports that 49 percent of the trackers said they track their progress “in their heads,” while 34 percent said they record the data on paper (for example, in a notebook or journal) and just 21 percent said they use some form of technology to track their health data. Respondents were allowed to provide more than one response, which is why the total is greater than 100 percent.  But Pew said it considers 50 percent of respondents to be “formal trackers” who log their data in an organized way with notebooks or apps and 44 percent to be “informal trackers” who only record progress in their heads.

      A benchmark for the future

      A Pew study from 2011 looked at the health tracking behaviors of U.S. Internet users, finding that a quarter of them track their health online. But Susannah Fox, Pew’s associate director of digital strategy, said this is the first national survey measuring health data tracking among the general population. As digital tools for monitoring health data continue to proliferate, this survey can provide a benchmark against which future progress can be measured.

      “We’ve got this massive potential of a market and yet we still have relatively low uptake,” Fox said. “We don’t have the answers in terms of what will change their minds or entice them to change their habits. What we do know now is how many people are doing it and already what impact that is having. Maybe in the future, if people can be seduced to upgrade to fancier technology that will actually move the needle on their heath outcome.”

      Implications for digital health companies

      For companies pushing health-monitoring technology, Pew’s study could strengthen their case, as it shows that tracking can make a difference. For example:

      • 46 percent of trackers said it changed their approach to maintaining their own health or the health of someone for whom they provide care.
      • 49 percent said it led them to ask a doctor a new question or seek a second opinion.
      • 34 percent it affected a decision about how to treat an illness or condition.

      The report also indicates that there are several markets within health tracking that are ripe for the tapping.  Potential consumers span from casual health trackers interested in losing weight and improving their diet to those with chronic conditions to caretakers.

      But the considerable number of people who seem content with taking the low-tech route means that digital health companies need to provide options that can compete with the convenience and familiarity of a notebook or the ease of just remembering information in your head. Developers and device makers are increasingly offering sophisticated health tracking and analysis technology. But, given that plenty of health apps are little more than digitized notebooks with minimal functionality, you can’t blame people who’d rather just scribble in a journal.

      “The competition for mind share is not between different health apps,” said Fox. “It’s between health apps and a notebook and health apps and just your scale at home.”

      You can check out the full report on Pew’s website, but here are some other interesting findings:

      • The majority of respondents – 60 percent – say they track their weight, diet or exercise, with older Americans reporting that they’re more likely to track these metrics than younger Americans. About a third track health indicators like blood pressure, blood sugar, headaches or sleep patterns, and 12 percent say they track health indicators for a loved one.
      • Those with no chronic conditions are least likely to say that they track health indicators (19 percent), while 40 percent of adults with one condition are trackers and 62 percent with 2+ conditions are trackers.
      • Younger adults are more likely to keep track of their data in their heads (55 percent of 18-29 year-olds vs. 44 percent of those 65-year-olds and older), as are men (54 percent of men compared with 44 percent of women).

      Image by daniaphoto via Shutterstock.

    • Speed dating for startups: NYC and Health 2.0 pair health organizations with entrepreneurs

      In the past year, several startup accelerators have popped up around the country to give health tech entrepreneurs access to funding, mentors and other kinds of support. But a program launched this week in New York is taking an interesting new approach to encouraging digital health innovation.

      Backed by the New York City Economic Development Corporation and Health 2.0, PILOT Health Tech NYC is designed to pair health startups with city health organizations, including hospitals, pharmaceutical companies and nursing associations, for pilot programs.

      Funded by the city and part of a larger effort to boost life science and health care technology, the program will award up to $100,000 each to 10 pilot programs that will last three to six months.

      Jean-Luc Neptune, senior vice president of Health 2.0, a conference, media and innovation company in health tech, said that while health care organizations want to work with startups — and vice versa — it can take a couple of years for them to find the right partners and get the deal done. Hospitals, community groups and companies may not have the time or internal staff resources to research the best tech partners and implement new programs. And health entrepreneurs may not have the connections to navigate the larger ecosystem.

      “We’re closing the gaps and making it easy for the technology to get to the market and for the market to find the technology,” Neptune said.

      In partnership with the Blueprint Health accelerator and Startup Health academy, the new program is encouraging early-stage startups to attend “matchmaking sessions,” where they’ll meet with 10 to 20 “host” healthcare organizations. If the host organizations and startups make a match during the speed dating-like sessions, they’ll jointly apply for the $100,000 funding. Neptune said that startups and health organizations that have already expressed interest in working with each other can also apply to the program by its May deadline.

      In addition to Blueprint Health and Startup Health, New York is now host to the New York Digital Health Accelerator and the Bio and Health Tech Entrepreneurship Lab. But given that for many health tech startups, a big hurdle (often more than getting capital or finding talent) is commercializing the product, PILOT Health Tech NYC will be a nice complement to the city’s existing health entrepreneurship programs.