Google Docs – Spreadsheet.

It’s no secret, I’m a spreadsheet geek; an MSExcel geek to be more accurate. Today, I took the plunge and decided to try out Google’s spreadsheet application.

At first, I was pretty impressed. Not only did it handle all of my normal functions like sumif and vlookup, it even had a little hovering function template. It has lots of formats for numbers, though it is oddly missing the ability to manipulate the number of decimal places to display (you can do all of them, 2, or rounded to 0) unless you add a formula to round to a specific number of decimal places.

Also, there are many tables and charts that excel does not have, which can give a report serious pizzaz, or function as more than a spreadsheet. There are pictorial graphs (worms, chocolate, money all in the size of a bar chart), and there are moving flash graphs. There are also internet-savvy charts, like word-clouds! To function as more than a spreadsheet a Google gadget will produce a Gantt chart, with just task titles and dates. An org chart can also be created by listing manager’s names in one column and subordinates names in another (multiple columns = multiple levels).

However, there is an enormous barrier to using Google Spreadsheet if you are an analyst like me – there are not enough fields. The regular table only has 100 rows and columns to “T” (2003 Excel has 65000 rows and columns to “IV”, and even this is limiting, so I heard 2007 Excel has 100,000 rows). There are not many major trends that can be analyzed in only 100 rows, nor can an analyst find historical data within only 100 rows.

You can add up to 500 more rows, but no more columns. When I added the rows, the spreadsheet crashed.

I may try to use Google Spreadsheet again, in order to finish off a report. Apparently, .xls files can be uploaded into the Google application, so I can use it for my summary findings, and create some nifty charts and graphs for the ooh-la-la factor that execs are always dying for.
Are you catching this, Microsoft?

Online Health Self Help?

Can Web 2.0 help us avoid trips to the doctor? To the wrong doctor?

The other day, I had a sore throat. The last time I went to the doctor with a sore throat, they peered down it and said I was fine. This isn’t the first time a doctor has told me I was fine, when I was sure I had a malicious bug – maybe I’m a hypochondriac.

Another route I like to follow when I feel a bump in the wrong place or have a phantom pain is the web. There is instant gratification in self-diagnosis using a symptom checker. This is much quicker than making an appointment, taking time off work, and traveling to the doc’s (besides, the symptoms have usually subsided by then anyway).

WebMD is one I like because of the cool interface – touch a part of the body that hurts, and describe the symptom:

I found out, though, that this is not the most effective website. This is an article where several symptom checkers are reviewed. Looks like WrongDiagnosis.com is the winner.
http://www.itbusiness.ca/it/client/en/Home/News.asp?id=52025&PageMem=2

There are stories about hypochondriacs over-hyping their symptoms (“why aren’t we going to rule out ovarian cancer, are you sure its just a UTI?”), and there are stories about people who under-diagnose themselves, and end up having awful infections that could have been avoided had they just gone to the doctor.

There are also those who, after receiving a diagnosis from a doctor, surf the web incessantly, trying to find alternative cures their doc didn’t mention.

For these reasons, many doctors loudly proclaim that the Internet should not be a place people go to for their own health care.

Docs also don’t want patients posting reviews on their medical care online. Just like Yelp!, sites that allow patients to write public comments about doctors end up with libel issues. There are even doctors that are beginning to ask patients to sign a waiver, stating that they will not post reviews online without the doc’s permission. More in this NPR story: http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=102297861&m=102297852
Bottom line – I will keep surfing online for medical advice. I know that I am on the hypochondriac side, so I won’t under-diagnose myself. Also, I trust my doctor, so if she isn’t worried about a symptom, I won’t be worried either. On that note, the only thing most patients can review about a doctor is their bedside manner – that trust factor. Unless someone has received a second opinion from another doctor, or has attended medical school themselves, people should not make claims against a doc’s ability as a scientist and healer.

Yelp!

Yelp is a customer review web page, which is a great way to figure out what’s going on from locals.

This site may compete a bit with TripAdvisor, but the thing that differentiates Yelp from TripAdvisor is that the reviews are for locals, by locals. Any and all companies can be reviewed – this is not limited to “top things to do,” but includes local pet stores and hair salons in addition to restaurants and bars.

Another site that may compete with Yelp is GetSatisfaction. However, GetSatisfaction is more for customer complaints, while Yelp is all reviews – in fact, on Yelp, there are 60% positive reviews (4 or 5 stars), 20% neutral (3 stars), and 20% negative (2 or 1 stars).

The upside is clear – people looking for products and services can find them with the help of prior customers. Businesses get “free” PR from customers who want to talk publicly about their experiences.

In the middle is the way Yelp makes money. Apparently, Businesses can pay fees to Yelp in order to have a “fancier” review page, and be allowed to “thank” individual customers for good reviews. They also have the ability to highlight one review to post at the top of their Business Page.

There has been some scandal over whether paying sponsors have other benefits – like negative reviews dropping to the bottom, or being deleted by Yelp altogether. However, Yelp firmly denies that these are benefits of sponsorship.

The downside - in all open online forums, people are making public statements. If these statements are unfairly negative, the victims may sue for libel. Defamation is a tough case to make, but more than one Yelp reviewer has been sued by the business that upset them.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/161997/dentist_can_proceed_with_lawsuit_against_yelp_reviewers.html

While I understand why laws against defamation exist, I am truly concerned about the fact that a business (especially one with deep pockets) can tie up a customer (usually smaller pockets) in a lawsuit. Spreading negative reviews by Word of Mouth is the best defense that customers have against businesses that would otherwise rip them off, or sell sub-par service or products.

It seems like the only defense against this is to have the businesses who are reviewed on Yelp agree to having the reviews posted. In their Terms&Conditions, businesses could agree not to sue reviewers. Instead, the company could simply refute a disputed review.
Because social media is a conversation, companies can participate openly with customers, rather than pitting themselves against their customers!