IntellaRx
Insights
Notes on the opioid crisis, prescribing policy and the evidence behind them — written for the people who have to make decisions about it.
-
What a scoping conversation covers
The first conversation is about whether this helps you, and sometimes the answer is no.
-
Evaluating a pilot honestly
Most pilots in this field cannot fail. That is what is wrong with them.
-
The simplest model that works
Why this program deliberately avoids the most capable model available, and what “interpretable” has to mean to be worth anything.
-
What supply signal analysis actually looks at
“Social media analysis” is a phrase that should make you suspicious. Here is precisely what this component does and does not do.
-
What pharmacogenomics can and cannot do
The mechanism is real. The dose-prediction claim is not supported. Both of those are true and they get collapsed constantly.
-
What a pharmacist can actually see
A prescription arrives that looks unusual. Here is the information the person deciding whether to fill it actually has.
-
Consent that means something
A consent you cannot refuse is not a consent. The test is what happens to someone who says no.
-
What an agency should and should not see
The line between what a clinician needs and what a funder needs is sharper than most programs draw it.
-
Data minimization in practice
The rule that decides what a system holds: if nothing changes when a value changes, do not collect it.
-
Why trust is load-bearing, not decorative
Every clinical component of this program depends on people telling the truth. That makes trust an engineering constraint, not a value.
-
Questions worth asking any vendor in this field
Including us. Several of these are questions we would rather you asked before signing than afterwards.
-
What a program is, and is not
IntellaRx is not a clinic, a pharmacy, a software product or a consultancy. The distinctions are not pedantic — they determine who is responsible for what.