This is planotim's Profile page. Use it to view planotim's comments, other users' replies to these comments, and comments planotim has endorsed.

What's Happening Now

April 7, 2013 2:25 pm

With the enormous amount of data, apps, programs, insurers, providers, etc. It is the patient with varied levels of intellect that will be lost. Simple identity name portals need to be created to route the individual and or services to the common identity profile. I told Obama years ago that they could use the following URL’s to create user centric UID’s specific to this cause and they are still free to use. This is a Global identity bridge and not a silo/silo approach. The portals I offered were,,,,, and a few more. See complete list of identity bridge url’s at Therefore, if a patient was created, it would have an email of xxxx@mypatientid.commore »

…or a medical record would follow the same. Keeping it this simple will save enormous time for end users as well as integrated support systems. Not to mention privacy. « less
April 7, 2013 2:44 pm

Two such portals that I can provide are and Senario..A student logs into then selects a bridge identity function to and then to There the student would be presented to repository of all medical related opt in selections from providers etc.. Same for the MyOptOut. Keeping it simple and standardized with specific name services will help all parties involved and minimize the maze or User interfaces.

April 13, 2013 9:53 am

Hardly, a person, patient, or healthcare provider would be issued a quantum generated UID, and etc. Emails are unique addresses and if not duplicated, can only be linked to a new ID internal identity database by the use case. If a user prefers a common name email, then they could bridge that to the assigned using two or three factor authentication or even better to or if they wanted that level of authentication. I would prefer that any provider or service create a URL with the prefix My(TrademarkName) and use this as there gateway identity encrypted service. If a person wanted a specific name, they would go to and create… more »

…a unique name and authenticate. Once authenticated, they could bridge this ID to any of the three hundred or so My-ID sites or any registered provider/service My..ID site..say etc. Chained identities are user centric and managed to provide minimal duplication of data. ie. a person is authenticated at and then binds this to and then to, and to When the user presents the registered and authenticated NFC phone at the system, the process is painless and automatic. When the rentor is involved in an accident, the Authenticate medic has access to a host of linked ( authorized data by the vehicle, phone, and even if the person is unconscious. An individual and or service can therefore access specific data without even knowing the name of the person unless the person pre-authorized that data (
The possibilities are endless and would saave cabillions!! « less
April 13, 2013 1:27 pm

I agree with gmartin but take into account that there are a few other identities to the equation.,,,,,,,,,,,,and a few more that are required for these transactions to occur in order for the Patient to have user centric control of the data. In order for the issued ID to maintain its value, it must not be issued nor controlled by any government. This is a global identity issue if I may say. I would not want data in the direct control and management of any one state, nation, or government.

April 13, 2013 1:52 pm

To clarify the log-in part of the moderator response..
A login in my mind is an “identity” just like any other item of user ID control. The next generation of login management will be defined as to what you have selected.. maybe at or, or These and maybe other third party Identity management services will propagate your “Login ID” to link your user selected services. So, in a nut shell, select any ID in any capacity, authenticate, bridge, and enjoy. We need to get more simple with this to enjoy life a bit more than discussing this all the time.

April 7, 2013 5:08 pm

Welcome to Planning Room planotim, and thank you for your comment. In trying to make health IT more accessible for patients, you suggest the use of a patient’s name @ a specific URL as their log-in. Could you elaborate on the benefits this approach would have, as compared to a user-selected name? Would the likelihood of duplicate names make your system confusing for providers?

April 13, 2013 11:55 am

Thank you for your response, planotim. What do other commenters think of planotim’s suggestion of creating a common identity profile that providers and services could access when authorized?

No comments