I just don't think that's true, but I'd love to be wrong.
Any given time 1/3rd of the user-base is dead... and it's growing because the data has to remain in the system for 60 months (HIPAA). It's not scary because it's B.S... No single or group of health provider in the world is close to having access to 125 million active patient-users on an annual basis.
Until Epic disclose any numbers in their 10Q/10K, realize that they're probably taking about "rows" in a db table or nonesuch, not actual patients or anything that will get them in trouble with the SEC/FDA.
I'd guess the reality is Nike is much closer in having shoes on half of the US pedestrian population than Epic having HL7/PII data.
> Health care groups using Epic electronic health records serve 54 percent of patients in the U.S. and 2.5 percent of patients worldwide, CEO Judy Faulkner said at Epic’s users group meeting in September.
I have no idea what the actual number is, but I remember reading that Epic is in about 20% of hospitals. and in many/most academic centers. Given the number of people who've been seen in an academic center at least once (whether for their own birth, a consultation at some point in life, ER visit, etc), Epic systems likely have entries on a substantial portion of the population, though the amount of people they have complete medical records for is likely much smaller
Any given time 1/3rd of the user-base is dead... and it's growing because the data has to remain in the system for 60 months (HIPAA). It's not scary because it's B.S... No single or group of health provider in the world is close to having access to 125 million active patient-users on an annual basis.
Until Epic disclose any numbers in their 10Q/10K, realize that they're probably taking about "rows" in a db table or nonesuch, not actual patients or anything that will get them in trouble with the SEC/FDA.
I'd guess the reality is Nike is much closer in having shoes on half of the US pedestrian population than Epic having HL7/PII data.