Long-term doctor-patient relationships: patient perspective from online reviews

Effect of Negative Online Reviews and Physician Responses on Health Consumers' Choice: Experimental Study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of online medical services. Although some researchers have investigated how numerical ratings affect consumer choice, limited studies have focused on the effect of negative reviews that most concern physicians.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate how negative review features, including proportion (low/high), claim type (evaluative/factual), and physician response (absence/presence), influence consumers' physician evaluation process under conditions in which a physician's overall rating is high.

METHODS

Using a 2×2×2 between-subject decision-controlled experiment, this study examined participants' judgment on physicians with different textual reviews. Collected data were analyzed using the t test and partial least squares-structural equation modeling.

RESULTS

Negative reviews decreased consumers' physician selection intention. The negative review proportion (β=-0.371, P<.001) and claim type (β=-0.343, P<.001) had a greater effect on consumers' physician selection intention compared to the physician response (β=0.194, P<.001). A high negative review proportion, factual negative reviews, and the absence of a physician response significantly reduced consumers' physician selection intention compared to their counterparts. Consumers' locus attributions on the negative reviews affected their evaluation process. Physician attribution mediated the effects of review proportion (β=-0.150, P<.001), review claim type (β=-0.068, P=.01), and physician response (β=0.167, P<.001) on consumer choice. Reviewer attribution also mediated the effects of review proportion (β=-0.071, P<.001), review claim type (β=-0.025, P=.01), and physician response (β=0.096, P<.001) on consumer choice. The moderating effects of the physician response on the relationship between review proportion and physician attribution (β=-0.185, P<.001), review proportion and reviewer attribution (β=-0.110, P<.001), claim type and physician attribution (β=-0.123, P=.003), and claim type and reviewer attribution (β=-0.074, P=.04) were all significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Negative review features and the physician response significantly influence consumer choice through the causal attribution to physicians and reviewers. Physician attribution has a greater effect on consumers' physician selection intention than reviewer attribution does. The presence of a physician response decreases the influence of negative reviews through direct and moderating effects. We propose some practical implications for physicians, health care providers, and online medical service platforms.

The Credibility of Physician Rating Websites: A Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

Increasingly, the credibility of online reviews is drawing critical attention due to the lack of control mechanisms, the constant debate about fake reviews and, last but not least, current developments in the field of artificial intelligence. For this reason, the aim of this study was to examine the extent to which assessments recorded on physician rating websites (PRWs) are credible, based on a comparison to other evaluation criteria.

METHODS

Referring to the PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted across different scientific databases. Data were synthesized by comparing individual statistical outcomes, objectives and conclusions.

RESULTS

The chosen search strategy led to a database of 36,755 studies of which 28 were ultimately included in the systematic review. The literature review yielded mixed results regarding the credibility of PRWs. While seven publications supported the credibility of PRWs, six publications found no correlation between PRWs and alternative datasets. 15 studies reported mixed results.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has shown that ratings on PRWs seem to be credible when relying primarily on patients' perception. However, these portals seem inadequate to represent alternative comparative values such as the medical quality of physicians. For health policy makers our results show that decisions based on patients' perceptions may be well supported by data from PRWs. For all other decisions, however, PRWs do not seem to contain sufficiently useful data.

Factors Associated with the Patient/Client Use of Report Cards, Physician Rating Websites, Social Media, and Google for Hospital and Physician Selection: A Nationwide Survey

Objective: To explore the factors associated with the different uses of report cards, physician rating websites, social media, and Google, including awareness, physician finding, and decision-making based on reviews from the patient/client perspective. Methods: We used computer-assisted telephone interviews to conduct a nationwide representative survey in Taiwan. Results: The urbanization level of the area, income, and long-term health conditions were not associated with the three kinds of usage of the websites studied. Seeking health information was an important factor in the three kinds of website use. The employment industry was associated with awareness, and education level was associated with physician seeking and actions based on reviews. Conclusions: Different factors influenced the three kinds of usage: awareness, actual use (i.e., finding an appropriate physician), and decision-making based on reviews. Seeking health information is of primary importance regardless of how the websites are used. Practical implications: Policy-makers should focus on educating individuals working outside the health care sector to increase awareness of these websites and to assist individuals with low levels of education in increasing their use of these websites.

Explore How Online Healthcare Can Influence Willingness to Seek Offline Care

With the recent development of internet healthcare, many hospitals have laid out their online platforms. However, there have been some poor service levels and low quality. The frequency of such problems has led to a decline in patient satisfaction. Therefore, it is vital to explore how hospitals can improve user satisfaction and willingness to visit them offline by setting up an online presence. Most studies conducted so far have remained limited to the single dimension of online or offline healthcare, with few studies exploring the relationship between them. While a few studies have explored the impact of online service quality on willingness to seek offline care, they also face the problem of a single perspective of analysis. Therefore, this study constructs a multidimensional model of the factors influencing online healthcare users' willingness to seek offline care by integrating the value-based adoption model and the stimulus-organism-response model. Through a partial least squares-structural equation modelling analysis of 283 valid samples, this study found that online doctor-patient interactions and service quality positively impact user perception. This paper explores the development path of online healthcare from a new theoretical perspective. In addition, the findings provide new guidelines for hospitals to achieve economic and social benefits.

Physician Gender, Patient Risk, and Web-Based Reviews: Longitudinal Study of the Relationship Between Physicians' Gender and Their Web-Based Reviews

Background

Web-based reviews of physicians have become exceedingly popular among health care consumers since the early 2010s. A factor that can potentially influence these reviews is the gender of the physician, because the physician’s gender has been found to influence patient-physician communication. Our study is among the first to conduct a rigorous longitudinal analysis to study the effects of the gender of physicians on their reviews, after accounting for several important clinical factors, including patient risk, physician specialty, and temporal factors, using time fixed effects. In addition, this study is among the first to study the possible gender bias in web-based reviews using statewide data from Alabama, a predominantly rural state with high Medicaid and Medicare use.

Objective

This study conducts a longitudinal empirical investigation of the relationship between physician gender and their web-based reviews using data across the state of Alabama, after accounting for patient risk and temporal effects.

Methods

We created a unique data set by combining data from web-based physician reviews from the popular physician review website, RateMDs, and clinical data from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services for the state of Alabama. We used longitudinal econometric specifications to conduct an econometric analysis, while controlling for several important clinical and review characteristics across four rating dimensions (helpfulness, knowledge, staff, and punctuality). The overall rating and these four rating dimensions from RateMDs were used as the dependent variables, and physician gender was the key explanatory variable in our panel regression models.

Results

The panel used to conduct the main econometric analysis included 1093 physicians. After controlling for several clinical and review factors, the physician random effects specifications showed that male physicians receive better web-based ratings than female physicians. Coefficients and corresponding SEs and P values of the binary variable GenderFemale (1 for female physicians and 0 otherwise) with different rating variables as outcomes were as follows: OverallRating (coefficient –0.194, SE 0.060; P=.001), HelpfulnessRating (coefficient –0.221, SE 0.069; P=.001), KnowledgeRating (coefficient –0.230, SE 0.065; P<.001), StaffRating (coefficient –0.123, SE 0.062; P=.049), and PunctualityRating (coefficient –0.200, SE 0.067; P=.003). The negative coefficients indicate a bias toward male physicians versus female physicians for aforementioned rating variables.

Conclusions

This study found that female physicians receive lower web-based ratings than male physicians even after accounting for several clinical characteristics associated with the physicians and temporal effects. Although the magnitude of the coefficients of GenderFemale was relatively small, they were statistically significant. This study provides support to the findings on gender bias in the existing health care literature. We contribute to the existing literature by conducting a study using data across the state of Alabama and using a longitudinal econometric analysis, along with incorporating important clinical and review controls associated with the physicians.

Interprofessional primary care: indispensable for family physicians yet invisible to older patients

There is growing consensus that interprofessional primary care is key to delivering timely, coordinated, and comprehensive care, especially in the older patient population who often live with complex and chronic needs. Despite significant investments in reforming health systems toward interprofessional primary care, there is a paucity of evidence describing the importance of interprofessional primary care for older patients and physicians. This qualitative descriptive study aimed to understand the use and utility of interprofessional primary care for older patients and family physicians from the perspective of different stakeholders within primary care in Ontario, Canada. Twenty-five semi-structured interviews (including 16 older patients, six family physicians, three primary care managers) and a focus group with 13 patient representatives were conducted. Our study found that while the benefits of interprofessional primary care teams for family physicians were clearly emphasized, stakeholders consistently reported that older patients often appeared to be unaware of the presence of, or roles played by, non-physician healthcare professionals in their clinic. Better transparency and education regarding available services and roles of different care providers may allow for more optimal use of interprofessional family medicine clinics by patients.

Impact of COVID-19 on Primary Care Practice Sites and Their Vulnerable Patients

Purpose: While COVID-19 has upended lives, it has also catalyzed innovation with potential to advance health delivery. Yet, we know little about how the delivery system, and primary care in particular, has responded and how this has impacted vulnerable patients. We aimed to understand the impact of COVID-19 on primary care practice sites and their vulnerable patients and to identify explanations for variation. Approach: We developed and administered a survey to practice managers and physician leaders from 173 primary care practice sites, October-November 2020. We report and graphically depict results from univariate analysis and examine potential explanations for variation in practices' process innovations in response to COVID-19 by assessing bivariate relationships between seven dependent variables and four independent variables. Findings: Among 96 (55.5%) respondents, primary care practice sites on average took more safety (8.5 of 12) than financial (2.5 of 17) precautions in response to COVID-19. Practice sites varied in their efforts to protect patients with vulnerabilities, providing care initially postponed, and experience with virtual visits. Financial risk, practice size, practitioner age, and emergency preparedness explained variation in primary care practices' process innovations. Many practice sites plan to sustain virtual visits, dependent mostly on patient and provider preference and continued reimbursement. Value: While findings indicate rapid and substantial innovation, conditions must enable primary care practice sites to build on and sustain innovations, to support care for vulnerable populations, including those with multiple chronic conditions and socio-economic barriers to health, and to prepare primary care for future emergencies.

Patient experiences at dental school clinics: A comparative analysis of online reviews

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

Online review sites have become popular platforms for health care consumers to rate their experiences. An analysis of online reviews can help dental school clinics learn from patient feedback that is not accessible through formal patient surveys. This study's objectives were to characterize patient-generated reviews posted on the Yelp and Google review sites and assess any associations between dental schools' ratings and their respective characteristics.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study analyzed patient-generated Yelp and Google reviews regarding their experiences at 65 dental school clinics between June and August 2019. Quantitative analysis of selected dental school characteristics and patient ratings was performed using analysis of variance, with effect size measured by the omega-squared (ω² ) statistic. Statistical significance was set at p = 0.05. Qualitative analysis of review content was conducted using NVivo software.

RESULTS

Among 65 dental schools in the Unite States, 63 schools (96.9%) had reviews available on Google, and 55 schools (84.6%) had reviews available on Yelp. A total of 4702 patient reviews were included in the analysis (2516 [53.5%] from Google [mean rating = 3.6 ± 0.6 stars] and 2186 [46.5%] from Yelp [mean rating = 3.1 ± 0.9 stars). A school location in the South/Midwest was significantly associated with a higher Yelp rating compared with a school location in the Northeast/West (ω²  = 0.140, 95% confidence interval = 0.002-0.310, p = 0.003). Qualitative analysis found that review content was predominantly negative; while subthemes in care delivery generated positive responses to care quality, those regarding the pre-care and post-care categories garnered negative responses. This finding was particularly true for comments addressing staff helpfulness, billing and payment, and clinic functioning.

CONCLUSIONS

This study's findings indicated that dental programs' online reviews were predominantly negative and covered categories that were not addressed in existing satisfaction surveys.

General Perception of Doctor-Patient Relationship From Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic in China: A Cross-Sectional Study

The doctor–patient relationship (DPR) is essential in the process of medical consultations and treatments. Poor DPR may lead to poor medical outcomes, medical violence against doctors, and a negative perception of the healthcare system. Little is known about how DPR is affected during this novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This cross-sectional study aimed to explore the DPR during the COVID-19 pandemic. There were 1,903 participants in China (95% response rate) who were recruited during the pandemic online via convenience and snowball sampling. Several questionnaires were used to evaluate participants' attitudes toward DPR, including the Patient–Doctor Relationship Questionnaire (PDRQ-9), Chinese Wake Forest Physician Trust Scale (C-WFPTS), a survey on medical violence against doctors, factors that affect and improve DPR, and general trust in medical services. Results revealed that DPR improved, and doctor–patient trust increased compared to participants' retrospective attitude before the pandemic. In addition, patients' violence against doctors decreased during the pandemic. Better doctor–patient trust and lower violence toward doctors are related to better DPR. Furthermore, we found that the main factors that could improve DPR include communication between doctors and patients, medical technology and services, and medical knowledge for patients. This study helped to better understand DPR in China, which may contribute to future health policies and medical practices in order to improve DPR and doctor–patient trust.

Primary care experience and remission of type 2 diabetes: a population-based prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Remission of Type 2 diabetes is achievable through dietary change and weight loss. In the UK, lifestyle advice and referrals to weight loss programmes predominantly occur in primary care where most Type 2 diabetes is managed.

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the association between primary care experience and remission of Type 2 diabetes over 5-year follow-up.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of adults with Type 2 diabetes registered to 49 general practices in the East of England, UK. Participants were followed-up for 5 years and completed the Consultation and Relational Empathy measure (CARE) on diabetes-specific primary care experiences over the first year after diagnosis of the disease. Remission at 5-year follow-up was measured with HbA1c levels. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to quantify the association between primary care experience and remission of diabetes.

RESULTS

Of 867 participants, 30% (257) achieved remission of Type 2 diabetes at 5 years. Six hundred twenty-eight had complete data at follow-up and were included in the analysis. Participants who reported higher CARE scores in the 12 months following diagnosis were more likely to achieve remission at 5 years in multivariable models; odds ratio = 1.03 (95% confidence interval = 1.01-1.05, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Primary care practitioners should pay greater attention to delivering optimal patient experiences alongside clinical management of the disease as this may contribute towards remission of Type 2 diabetes. Further work is needed to examine which aspects of the primary care experience might be optimized and how these could be operationalized.

Understanding Physicians’ Online-Offline Behavior Dynamics: An Empirical Study

Online healthcare platforms allow physicians and patients to communicate in a timely manner. Yet little is known about how physicians’ online and offline activities affect each other and, consequently, the healthcare system. We collected data from both online and offline channels to study physicians’ online-offline behavior dynamics. We find that physicians’ online activities can lead to a higher service quantity in offline channels, whereas offline activities may reduce physicians’ online services because of resource constraints. We also find that the more offline patients that physicians serve, the more articles the physicians will likely share in online healthcare platforms. These findings are of great importance to practitioners and policy makers. Our work provides evidence that online healthcare platforms supplement offline services and thus lessen the concern that physicians’ participation in online healthcare platforms will negatively influence offline healthcare services. Our findings also indicate the need for the improvement of online-offline coordination and better system design.

Spectacle Independence After Cataract Surgery: A Prospective Study With a Multifocal Intraocular Lens

Our aim was to review clinical outcome and patient satisfaction after cataract surgery to obtain spectacle independence following multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. A prospective case-series study was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Hanita FullRange pseudophakic multifocal intraocular lens in patients with programmed cataract surgery, performed between October 2017 and May 2018, with follow-up after 12 months. Manifest refraction spherical equivalent (SE), SE refractive accuracy, uncorrected distance (UDVA), intermediate (UIVA) and near visual acuity (UNVA) and a binocular defocus curve were evaluated. In addition, a short "satisfaction questionnaire" was developed. Surgeries were performed without viscoelastic substance. The corneal endothelial cell density (ECD), central corneal thickness (CCT) and intraocular pressure (IOP) were also evaluated. A total of 480 eyes of 240 patients with mean ± standard deviation (SD) of age of 75 ± 6.12 years were included. The mean ± standard deviation (SD) of preoperative SE was 2.0 ± 2.18 D (range; -5.50 to 4.75) which decreased to -0.04 ± 0.28 D (range; -0.75 to 0.625) 12 months after surgery. Regarding SE refractive accuracy 82.9 % of eyes obtained SE values between -0.5 and 0.5 D. There was no loss of lines of vision and 98.3% of patients achieved UDVA between 20/20 and 20/25. The UNVA (binocular) obtained was J1 for 72.5% and J2 for 27.5% of patients. Regarding defocus curve, 0.04 logMAR for -3.0 D, 0.09 logMAR for -1.5 D and 0.03 logMAR for 0 D was achieved. The mean CCT was increased by 6.62 ± 2.79 micrometer (1.24%), the mean ECD was decreased by 226.08 ± 11.63 cell/mm² (9.00 %) and the IOP remained stable one year after surgery. In response to the satisfaction questionnaire, 92% of patients stated that they had obtained spectacle independence. Finally, spectacle independence was achieved in most of the cases, with a high level of patient satisfaction one year after implantation of a FullRange IOL. No complications were detected. We concluded that the refractive efficacy of FullRange multifocal IOL was proved in majority of cases. A large follow up period is necessary in future studies to confirm the results.

Long story short: finding health advice with informative summaries on health social media

Purpose

Whether automatically generated summaries of health social media can aid users in managing their diseases appropriately is an important question. The purpose of this paper is to introduce a novel text summarization approach for acquiring the most informative summaries from online patient posts accurately and effectively.

Design/methodology/approach

The data set regarding diabetes and HIV posts was, respectively, collected from two online disease forums. The proposed summarizer is based on the graph-based method to generate summaries by considering social network features, text sentiment and sentence features. Representative health-related summaries were identified and summarization performance as well as user judgments were analyzed.

Findings

The findings show that awarding sentences without using all the incorporating features decreases summarization performance compared with the classic summarization method and comparison approaches. The proposed summarizer significantly outperformed the comparison baseline.

Originality/value

This study contributes to the literature on health knowledge management by analyzing patients’ experiences and opinions through the health summarization model. The research additionally develops a new mindset to design abstractive summarization weighting schemes from the health user-generated content.

Data Mining of the Reviews from Online Private Doctors

Background: User-generated content shared in the online health communities (OHCs) is becoming a valuable resource for researchers to understand patients' decision-making behaviors in the management of their health. Many studies have focused on how to obtain useful information from online reviews in OHCs. Introduction: This study focuses on a telemedicine service called Online Private Doctor (OPD), which is offered by a leading Chinese physician review website (PRW). OPD reviews have not received much attention. By data mining the reviews, our goal is to determine what patients are talking about when they use the OPD service and whether they are satisfied with the service or not. Materials and Methods: We used a Python web crawler to collect 41,029 reviews and 84,510 short reviews (labels) of all 5,645 physicians who offered the OPD service on a PRW (haodf.com) in China. Mixed methods (i.e., a literature review, topic discovery, annotation, and a sentiment analysis) were used to determine the information that the OPD reviews are meant to express. Results: We discovered that the OPD reviews can be categorized into four subjects: competence (35.1%), communication (29.4%), treatment (26.0%), and convenience (9.5%). In terms of previously discovered topics, we found that competence, communication, and treatment have been discussed before, but convenience is an emerging subject. The sentiment analysis indicated that 93.67% of the reviews indicated positive emotions, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve is 0.64. Furthermore, the labels indicated that only 0.72% (603/84,570) of reviews were negative toward the OPD service. The subjects of the labels were distributed according to competence (34.7%), communication (23.8%), treatment (33.5%), and convenience (8.0%). Discussion: The findings of our study suggest that patients who ever used OPD have been quite satisfied with the service. From their reviews, we discovered that OPD has its special characteristics and is convenient. However, it still has some shortcomings, for example, the quality of the phone connection. In terms of both the platform and the doctors, more efforts should be made to make the OPD better and more regulated. Conclusion: OPD is an emerging telemedicine service that still needs more time and space to evolve. For patients, it helps reduce problems such as scheduling and queuing. Therefore, it brings more convenience to people's daily lives. In the future, more attention should be paid to this service, as it is helpful in reducing the uneven distribution of medical resources.

A Comparison of Online Physician Ratings and Internal Patient-Submitted Ratings from a Large Healthcare System

BACKGROUND

Physician online ratings are ubiquitous and influential, but they also have their detractors. Given the lack of scientific survey methodology used in online ratings, some health systems have begun to publish their own internal patient-submitted ratings of physicians.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare online physician ratings with internal ratings from a large healthcare system.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study comparing online ratings with internal ratings from a large healthcare system.

SETTING

Kaiser Permanente, a large integrated healthcare delivery system.

PARTICIPANTS

Physicians in the Southern California region of Kaiser Permanente, including all specialties with ambulatory clinic visits.

MAIN MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was correlation between online physician ratings and internal ratings from the integrated healthcare delivery system.

RESULTS

Of 5438 physicians who met inclusion and exclusion criteria, 4191 (77.1%) were rated both online and internally. The online ratings were based on a mean of 3.5 patient reviews, while the internal ratings were based on a mean of 119 survey returns. The overall correlation between the online and internal ratings was weak (Spearman's rho .23), but increased with the number of reviews used to formulate each online rating.

CONCLUSIONS

Physician online ratings did not correlate well with internal ratings from a large integrated healthcare delivery system, although the correlation increased with the number of reviews used to formulate each online rating. Given that many consumers are not aware of the statistical issues associated with small sample sizes, we would recommend that online rating websites refrain from displaying a physician's rating until the sample size is sufficiently large (for example, at least 15 patient reviews). However, hospitals and health systems may be able to provide better information for patients by publishing the internal ratings of their physicians.

Using online patient feedback to improve NHS services: the INQUIRE multimethod study

Background

Online customer feedback has become routine in many industries, but it has yet to be harnessed for service improvement in health care.

Objectives

To identify the current evidence on online patient feedback; to identify public and health professional attitudes and behaviour in relation to online patient feedback; to explore the experiences of patients in providing online feedback to the NHS; and to examine the practices and processes of online patient feedback within NHS trusts.

Design

A multimethod programme of five studies: (1) evidence synthesis and stakeholder consultation; (2) questionnaire survey of the public; (3) qualitative study of patients’ and carers’ experiences of creating and using online comment; (4) questionnaire surveys and a focus group of health-care professionals; and (5) ethnographic organisational case studies with four NHS secondary care provider organisations.

Setting

The UK.

Methods

We searched bibliographic databases and conducted hand-searches to January 2018. Synthesis was guided by themes arising from consultation with 15 stakeholders. We conducted a face-to-face survey of a representative sample of the UK population (n = 2036) and 37 purposively sampled qualitative semistructured interviews with people with experience of online feedback. We conducted online surveys of 1001 quota-sampled doctors and 749 nurses or midwives, and a focus group with five allied health professionals. We conducted ethnographic case studies at four NHS trusts, with a researcher spending 6–10 weeks at each site.

Results

Many people (42% of internet users in the general population) read online feedback from other patients. Fewer people (8%) write online feedback, but when they do one of their main reasons is to give praise. Most online feedback is positive in its tone and people describe caring about the NHS and wanting to help it (‘caring for care’). They also want their feedback to elicit a response as part of a conversation. Many professionals, especially doctors, are cautious about online feedback, believing it to be mainly critical and unrepresentative, and rarely encourage it. From a NHS trust perspective, online patient feedback is creating new forms of response-ability (organisations needing the infrastructure to address multiple channels and increasing amounts of online feedback) and responsivity (ensuring responses are swift and publicly visible).

Limitations

This work provides only a cross-sectional snapshot of a fast-emerging phenomenon. Questionnaire surveys can be limited by response bias. The quota sample of doctors and volunteer sample of nurses may not be representative. The ethnographic work was limited in its interrogation of differences between sites.

Conclusions

Providing and using online feedback are becoming more common for patients who are often motivated to give praise and to help the NHS improve, but health organisations and professionals are cautious and not fully prepared to use online feedback for service improvement. We identified several disconnections between patient motivations and staff and organisational perspectives, which will need to be resolved if NHS services are to engage with this source of constructive criticism and commentary from patients.

Future work

Intervention studies could measure online feedback as an intervention for service improvement and longitudinal studies could examine use over time, including unanticipated consequences. Content analyses could look for new knowledge on specific tests or treatments. Methodological work is needed to identify the best approaches to analysing feedback.

Study registration

The ethnographic case study work was registered as Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN33095169.

Funding

This project was funded by the National institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 7, No. 38. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Online patient feedback: a scoping review and stakeholder consultation to guide health policy

Objective

To provide a synthesis of the current evidence base of online patient feedback using a scoping review and a consultation of stakeholders in England, UK.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and the Social Science Citation Index and conducted hand searches up to January 2018. We included primary studies of internet-based reviews and other online feedback (e.g. social media and blogs) from patients, carers or the public about health care providers (individuals, services or organizations). Key findings were extracted and tabulated for further synthesis guided by the themes arising from a stakeholder consultation.

Results

The review found that awareness and usage of online feedback is increasing. Most feedback is about physicians, and is typically positive. Online reviews and ratings are used by some service users to inform choice of provider or treatment while providers tend to be concerned about the validity and representativeness of feedback. Reviewed studies found that those who post feedback are generally not representative of the general population, tending to be younger and more educated, but online feedback does broadly correlate with some other measures of health care quality.

Conclusions

In an increasingly digital society, where citizens provide and use feedback for a range of goods and services, online patient feedback can offer a convenient, low cost and widely accessible mechanism to capture experiences of health care, while being mindful to avoid issues of digital exclusion. This review provides important insights to inform policy development seeking to harness the opportunities offered by online feedback.

Exploring the impact of online information signals in leveraging the economic returns of physicians

INTRODUCTION

With the growth in Internet technology, online rating websites encourage patients to contribute actively in rating their physicians. These rating sites provide more information for patients, such as electronic word of mouth (eWOM) and physician trustworthiness. Although several studies in e-commerce have investigated the role of eWOM and seller trustworthiness in the consumer purchase decision-making process and the price premium for products or services, studies on the role of different information sources that reflect the service quality and delivery process in choosing a competent physician remain scarce. This research develops a two-equation model to examine the effect of different signals, i.e., patient-generated signals (PGSs) and system-generated signals (SGSs), on patient choice, which is an important predictor of physicians' economic returns.

METHODS

A secondary data econometric analysis and structural modeling using 2896 physicians' real data from a publicly available online physician rating site, i.e., Healthgrades.com, were conducted using a mixed-methods approach. A hybrid text mining approach was adopted to calculate the sentiment of each review.

RESULTS

We find that both PGSs and SGSs have a significant impact on patient choice at different stages of health consultation. Furthermore, disease risk negatively moderates the association between PGSs and information search, while the impact of both signals on patient willingness to pay a price premium is positively moderated by the disease risk.

CONCLUSION

Our study contributes to the unified framework of signaling theory and Maslow's hierarchy of needs theory by making a clear distinction between PGSs or SGSs and their influence on patient decision-making across different disease risks. Moreover, PGSs and SGSs are two essential factors for physicians to increase their income.

What Do Patients Complain About Online: A Systematic Review and Taxonomy Framework Based on Patient Centeredness

Background

Complaints made online by patients about their health care experiences are becoming prevalent because of widespread worldwide internet connectivity. An a priori framework, based on patient centeredness, may be useful in identifying the types of issues patients complain about online across multiple settings. It may also assist in examining whether the determinants of patient-centered care (PCC) mirror the determinants of patient experiences.

Objective

The objective of our study was to develop a taxonomy framework for patient complaints online based on patient centeredness and to examine whether the determinants of PCC mirror the determinants of patient experiences.

Methods

First, the best fit framework synthesis technique was applied to develop the proposed a priori framework. Second, electronic databases, including Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed, were searched for articles published between 2000 and June 2018. Studies were only included if they collected primary quantitative data on patients’ online complaints. Third, a deductive and inductive thematic analysis approach was adopted to code the themes of recognized complaints into the framework.

Results

In total, 17 studies from 5 countries were included in this study. Patient complaint online taxonomies and theme terms varied. According to our framework, patients expressed most dissatisfaction with patient-centered processes (101,586/204,363, 49.71%), followed by prerequisites (appropriate skills and knowledge of physicians; 50,563, 24.74%) and the care environment (48,563/204,363, 23.76%). The least dissatisfied theme was expected outcomes (3651/204,363, 1.79%). People expressed little dissatisfaction with expanded PCC dimensions, such as involvement of family and friends (591/204,363, 0.29%). Variation in the concerns across different countries’ patients were also observed.

Conclusions

Online complaints made by patients are of major value to health care providers, regulatory bodies, and patients themselves. Our PCC framework can be applied to analyze them under a wide range of conditions, treatments, and countries. This review has shown significant heterogeneity of patients’ online complaints across different countries.

The Impact of Web-Based Ratings on Patient Choice of a Primary Care Physician Versus a Specialist: Randomized Controlled Experiment

Background

Physician review websites have empowered prospective patients to acquire information about physicians. However, little is known about how Web-based ratings on different aspects of a physician may affect patients’ selection of physicians differently.

Objective

The objectives of this study were to examine (1) how patients weigh ratings on a physician’s technical skills and interpersonal skills in their selection of physicians and (2) whether and how people’s choice of a primary care physician versus a specialist is affected differently by Web-based ratings.

Methods

A 2×2×2×2 between-subjects experiment was conducted. Over 600 participants were recruited through a crowdsourcing website and randomly assigned to view a mockup physician review Web page that contained information on a physician’s basic information and patients’ ratings. After reviewing the Web page, participants were asked to complete a survey on their perceptions of the physician and willingness to seek health care from the physician.

Results

The results showed that participants were more willing to choose a physician with higher ratings on technical skills than on interpersonal skills compared with a physician with higher ratings on interpersonal skills than on technical skills, t_369.96=22.36, P<.001, Cohen d=1.22. In the selection of different types of physicians, patients were more likely to choose a specialist with higher ratings on technical skills than on interpersonal skills, compared with a primary care physician with the same ratings, F_1,521=5.34, P=.021.

Conclusions

The findings suggest that people place more weight on technical skills than interpersonal skills in their selection of a physician based on their ratings on the Web. Specifically, people are more likely to make a compromise on interpersonal skills in their choice of a specialist compared with a primary care physician. This study emphasizes the importance of examining Web-based physician ratings in a more nuanced way in relation to the selection of different types of physicians.

Trial Registration

ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN91316463; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN91316463

What Do Patients Say About Doctors Online? A Systematic Review of Studies on Patient Online Reviews

Background

The number of patient online reviews (PORs) has grown significantly, and PORs have played an increasingly important role in patients’ choice of health care providers.

Objective

The objective of our study was to systematically review studies on PORs, summarize the major findings and study characteristics, identify literature gaps, and make recommendations for future research.

Methods

A major database search was completed in January 2019. Studies were included if they (1) focused on PORs of physicians and hospitals, (2) reported qualitative or quantitative results from analysis of PORs, and (3) peer-reviewed empirical studies. Study characteristics and major findings were synthesized using predesigned tables.

Results

A total of 63 studies (69 articles) that met the above criteria were included in the review. Most studies (n=48) were conducted in the United States, including Puerto Rico, and the remaining were from Europe, Australia, and China. Earlier studies (published before 2010) used content analysis with small sample sizes; more recent studies retrieved and analyzed larger datasets using machine learning technologies. The number of PORs ranged from fewer than 200 to over 700,000. About 90% of the studies were focused on clinicians, typically specialists such as surgeons; 27% covered health care organizations, typically hospitals; and some studied both. A majority of PORs were positive and patients’ comments on their providers were favorable. Although most studies were descriptive, some compared PORs with traditional surveys of patient experience and found a high degree of correlation and some compared PORs with clinical outcomes but found a low level of correlation.

Conclusions

PORs contain valuable information that can generate insights into quality of care and patient-provider relationship, but it has not been systematically used for studies of health care quality. With the advancement of machine learning and data analysis tools, we anticipate more research on PORs based on testable hypotheses and rigorous analytic methods.

Trial Registration

International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42018085057; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=85057 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/76ddvTZ1C)

Exploring the influence of resiliency on physician trust in patients: An empirical study of Chinese incidents

BACKGROUND

The tension in doctor-patient relationships is becoming progressively greater due to the high expectations of patients and the physicians' work pressure. Recent studies have addressed factors which affect the tension of doctor-patient relationships, and our study continues this trend by looking at the influence of resiliency and physician trust in the patient (PTP), that is, how much the doctor trusts the patient.

METHODS

Based on a survey of 329 physicians, a descriptive analysis of measured data was done using SPSS 19.0. Pearson correlation coefficient analysis was used to examine the correlation between PTP and resilience and the demographic variables. KMO and Bartlett methods were used to examine the correlation between PTPS and resilience. The method of factor analysis was used for multicollinearity tests, and multiple stepwise regression analysis was used to explore the demographic factors correlated with PTP and resilience.

RESULT

Our results indicate that the level of PTP is influenced by the age, education, and income of the doctors. Physician age and income are significantly and positively correlated with PTP, but education is significantly and negatively related. Age, education, and income also affect the level of psychological resilience of physicians. Resilience is positively correlated with age and education but is negatively related to income. Resilience positively influences PTP.

CONCLUSION

The direct factors of PTP include resilience, age, education, and income, while gender, title, and hospital department were found to be indirect influencing factors. To meet goals expressed in Chinese government policy related to these issues, we suggest improving the level of education of the doctors, providing reasonable annual salary increases for doctors, easing the tensions involved in medical treatment, reducing the physicians' work pressure, improving the physicians' work environment, and enhancing the physicians' professional sympathy. Through such measures, the level of PTP will be enhanced.

Patients' views on interactions with practitioners for type 2 diabetes: a longitudinal qualitative study in primary care over 10 years

BACKGROUND

It has been suggested that interactions between patients and practitioners in primary care have the potential to delay progression of complications in type 2 diabetes. However, as primary care faces greater pressures, patient experiences of patient-practitioner interactions might be changing.

AIM

To explore the views of patients with type 2 diabetes on factors that are of significance to them in patient-practitioner interactions in primary care after diagnosis, and over the last 10 years of living with the disease.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A longitudinal qualitative analysis over 10 years in UK primary care.

METHOD

The study was part of a qualitative and quantitative examination of patient experience within the existing ADDITION-Cambridge and ADDITION-Plus trials from 2002 to 2016. The researchers conducted a qualitative descriptive analysis of free-text comments to an open-ended question within the CARE measure questionnaire at 1 and 10 years after diagnosis with diabetes. Data were analysed cross-sectionally at each time point, and at an individual level moving both backwards and forwards between time points to describe emergent topics.

RESULTS

At the 1-year follow-up, 311 out of 1106 (28%) participants had commented; 101 out of 380 (27%) participants commented at 10-year follow-up; and 46 participants commented at both times. Comments on preferences for face-to-face contact, more time with practitioners, and relational continuity of care were more common over time.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights issues related to the wider context of interactions between patients and practitioners in the healthcare system over the last 10 years since diagnosis. Paradoxically, these same aspects of care that are valued over time from diagnosis are also increasingly unprotected in UK primary care.

Online Reviews as Health Data: Examining the Association Between Availability of Health Care Services and Patient Star Ratings Exemplified by the Yelp Academic Dataset

BACKGROUND

There have been public health interventions that aim to reduce barriers to health care access by extending opening hours of health care facilities. However, the impact of opening hours from the patient's perspective is not well understood.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate the relationship between temporal accessibility of health care services and how patients rate the providers on Yelp, an online review website that is popular in the United States. Using crowdsourced open Internet data, such as Yelp, can help circumvent the traditional survey method.

METHODS

From Yelp's limited academic dataset, this study examined the pattern of visits to health care providers and performed a secondary analysis to examine the association between patient rating (measured by Yelp's rating) and temporal accessibility of health care services (measured by opening hours) using ordinal logistic regression models. Other covariates included were whether an appointment was required, the type of health care service, the region of the health care service provider, the number of reviews the health care service provider received in the past, the number of nearby competitors, the mean rating of competitors, and the standard deviation of competitors' ratings.

RESULTS

From the 2085 health care service providers identified, opening hours during certain periods, the type of health care service, and the variability of competitors' ratings showed an association with patient rating. Most of the visits to health care service providers took place between normal working hours (9 AM-5 PM) from Sunday to Thursday, and the least on Saturday. A model fitted to the entire sample showed that increasing hours during normal working hours on Monday (OR 0.926, 95% CI 0.880-0.973, P=0.03), Saturday (OR 0.897, 95% CI 0.860-0.935, P<0.001), Sunday (OR 0.904, 95% CI 0.841-0.970, P=0.005), and outside normal working hours on Friday (OR 0.872, 95% CI 0.760-0.998, P=0.048) was associated with receiving lower ratings. But increasing hours during outside normal working hours on Sunday was associated with receiving higher ratings (OR 1.400, 95% CI 1.036-1.924, P=0.03). There were also observed differences in patient ratings among the health care services types, but not geographically or by appointment requirement.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that public health interventions, especially those involving opening hours, could use crowdsourced open Internet data to enhance the evidence base for decision making and evaluation in the future. This study illustrates one example of how Yelp data could be used to understand patient experiences with health care services, making a case for future research for exploring online reviews as a health dataset.

Hospital Quality Reporting in the United States: Does Report Card Design and Incorporation of Patient Narrative Comments Affect Hospital Choice?

OBJECTIVE

To explore the impact of hospital report card design and incorporation of patient narrative comments on consumers' choices of hospitals.

DATA SOURCES

Primary data collected from an online survey with 1,350 respondents in February, 2015.

STUDY DESIGN

A randomized 2 (narrative comments: yes, no) × 3 (design: representation of clinical performance in textual, star, numerical formats) between-subject online-based cross-sectional experiment.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

In 51 percent of all cases, respondents selected the hospital with the best clinical results. Report cards with a numerical design induced choices more focused on clinical ratings (56.0 percent chose the highest rated hospital) than those with textual information (48.1 percent) or star ratings (47.3 percent) (p < .001). Report cards without narrative comments (49.7 percent) and with narratives (51.4 percent) were not associated with significant difference in selecting top-rated clinical hospitals (p = .376). But there were significant interactions affecting choice of hospitals among exposure to narratives, formatting of clinical performance, and respondents' education.

CONCLUSIONS

Consumers have a difficult time synthesizing quality data in various formats. Hospital report cards continue to pose challenging choices, especially for those with limited education. Narrative comments in their earliest emerging forms do not seem to be altering hospital choice as much as the literature has suggested for other providers, but they may have consequential impact on the choices of certain subsets of consumers.

Association Between Physician Online Rating and Quality of Care

Background

Patients are increasingly using physician review websites to find “a good doctor.” However, to our knowledge, no prior study has examined the relationship between online rating and an accepted measure of quality.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to assess the association between online physician rating and an accepted measure of quality: 30-day risk-adjusted mortality rate following coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery.

Methods

In the US states of California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania—which together account for over one-quarter of the US population—risk-adjusted mortality rates are publicly reported for all cardiac surgeons. From these reports, we recorded the 30-day mortality rate following isolated CABG surgery for each surgeon practicing in these 5 states. For each surgeon listed in the state reports, we then conducted Internet-based searches to determine his or her online rating(s). We then assessed the relationship between physician online rating and risk-adjusted mortality rate.

Results

Of the 614 surgeons listed in the state reports, we found 96.1% (590/614) to be rated online. The average online rating was 4.4 out of 5, and 78.7% (483/614) of the online ratings were 4 or higher. The median number of reviews used to formulate each rating was 4 (range 1-89), and 32.70% (503/1538) of the ratings were based on 2 or fewer reviews. Overall, there was no correlation between surgeon online rating and risk-adjusted mortality rate (P=.13). Risk-adjusted mortality rates were similar for surgeons across categories of average online rating (P>.05), and surgeon average online rating was similar across quartiles of surgeon risk-adjusted mortality rate (P>.05).

Conclusions

In this study of cardiac surgeons practicing in the 5 US states that publicly report outcomes, we found no correlation between online rating and risk-adjusted mortality rates. Patients using online rating websites to guide their choice of physician should recognize that these ratings may not reflect actual quality of care as defined by accepted metrics.

Exploring Patients' Views Toward Giving Web-Based Feedback and Ratings to General Practitioners in England: A Qualitative Descriptive Study

Background

Patient feedback websites or doctor rating websites are increasingly being used by patients to give feedback about their health care experiences. There is little known about why patients in England may give Web-based feedback and what may motivate or dissuade them from giving Web-based feedback.

Objective

The aim of this study was to explore patients’ views toward giving Web-based feedback and ratings to general practitioners (GPs), within the context of other feedback methods available in primary care in England, and in particular, paper-based feedback cards.

Methods

A descriptive exploratory qualitative approach using face-to-face semistructured interviews was used in this study. Purposive sampling was used to recruit 18 participants from different age groups in London and Coventry. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using applied thematic analysis.

Results

Half of the participants in this study were not aware of the opportunity to leave feedback for GPs, and there was limited awareness about the methods available to leave feedback for a GP. The majority of participants were not convinced that formal patient feedback was needed by GPs or would be used by GPs for improvement, regardless of whether they gave it via a website or on paper. Some participants said or suggested that they may leave feedback on a website rather than on a paper-based feedback card for several reasons: because of the ability and ease of giving it remotely; because it would be shared with the public; and because it would be taken more seriously by GPs. Others, however, suggested that they would not use a website to leave feedback for the opposite reasons: because of accessibility issues; privacy and security concerns; and because they felt feedback left on a website may be ignored.

Conclusions

Patient feedback and rating websites as they currently are will not replace other mechanisms for patients in England to leave feedback for a GP. Rather, they may motivate a small number of patients who have more altruistic motives or wish to place collective pressure on a GP to give Web-based feedback. If the National Health Service or GP practices want more patients to leave Web-based feedback, we suggest they first make patients aware that they can leave anonymous feedback securely on a website for a GP. They can then convince them that their feedback is needed and wanted by GPs for improvement, and that the reviews they leave on the website will be of benefit to other patients to decide which GP to see or which GP practice to join.

Does the Press Ganey Survey Correlate to Online Health Grades for a Major Academic Otolaryngology Department?

Objectives

Analyze the correlation between online-based review websites and the Press Ganey Patient Satisfaction Survey (PGPSS) in an academic otolaryngology department.

Study Design

Retrospective cross sectional.

Setting

Tertiary academic institution.

Methods

All available data were collected for Vitals.com and Healthgrades.com , along with PGPSS data for 16 otolaryngology attending physicians from 2012 to 2014. A mean rating was calculated for each topic category for online websites and compared with 7 PGPSS content questions using zero-order correlations. A paired t test was used to analyze the difference between the PGPSS and online scores.

Results

There were no statistically significant correlations between time spent with the patient ( r = 0.391, P = .208) and overall provider scores ( r = 0.193, P = .508) when compared between Vitals.com and the PGPSS. The correlations were not statistically significant when Healthgrades.com was compared with the PGPSS in the items “probability of recommending the provider” ( r = −0.122, P = .666) and “trust in provider” ( r = −0.025, P = .929). The most important factors in a patient recommending the provider were as follows, per resource: time spent with the patient for Vitals.com ( r = 0.685, P = .014), listening for Healthgrades.com ( r = 0.981, P ≤ .001), and trust in the provider for the PGPSS ( r = 0.971, P ≤ .001).

Conclusion

This study suggests that online-based reviews do not have statistically significant correlations with the widely used PGPSS and may not be an accurate source of information for patients. Patients should have access to the most reliable and least biased surveys available to the public to allow for better-informed decisions regarding their health care.

Breaking Narrative Ground: Innovative Methods for Rigorously Eliciting and Assessing Patient Narratives

OBJECTIVE

To design a methodology for rigorously eliciting narratives about patients' experiences with clinical care that is potentially useful for public reporting and quality improvement.

DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING

Two rounds of experimental data (N = 48 each) collected in 2013-2014, using a nationally representative Internet panel.

STUDY DESIGN

Our study (1) articulates and operationalizes criteria for assessing narrative elicitation protocols; (2) establishes a "gold standard" for assessment of such protocols; and (3) creates and tests a protocol for narratives about outpatient treatment experiences.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

We randomized participants between telephone and web-based modalities and between protocols placed before and after a closed-ended survey.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Elicited narratives can be assessed relative to a gold standard using four criteria: (1) meaningfulness, (2) completeness, (3) whether the narrative accurately reflects the balance of positive and negative events, and (4) representativeness, which reflects the protocol's performance across respondent subgroups. We demonstrate that a five-question protocol that has been tested and refined yields three- to sixfold increases in completeness and four- to tenfold increases in meaningfulness, compared to a single open-ended question. It performs equally well for healthy and sick patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Narrative elicitation protocols suitable for inclusion in extant patient experience surveys can be designed and tested against objective performance criteria, thus advancing the science of public reporting.

Online Patient Ratings: Why They Matter and What They Mean

The increasing focus on patient satisfaction and consumer-driven health care, combined with the recent rise in online social media, have resulted in the growing trend of patients rating physicians on publicly accessible Web sites. The number and use of such Web sites continue to grow despite potential concerns about the validity of these ratings and negative physician perception. These Web sites can influence patient decision making regarding physician selection. In this article, we review the literature regarding the use of such Web sites by patients, the validity of these ratings, potential implications for hand surgical practice, and methods to minimize or challenge inaccurate reviews.

From the closest observers of patient care: a thematic analysis of online narrative reviews of hospitals

OBJECTIVE

Patient-centred care has become a priority in many countries. It is unknown whether current tools capture aspects of care patients and their surrogates consider important. We investigated whether online narrative reviews from patients and surrogates reflect domains in the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) and we described additional potential domains.

DESIGN

We used thematic analysis to assess online narrative reviews for reference to HCAHPS domains and salient non-HCAHPS domains and compared results by reviewer type (patient vs surrogate).

SETTING

We identified hospitals for review from the American Hospital Association database using a stratified random sampling approach. This approach ensured inclusion of reviews of a diverse set of hospitals. We searched online in February 2013 for narrative reviews from any source for each hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

We included up to two narrative reviews for each hospital.

EXCLUSIONS

Outpatient or emergency department reviews, reviews from self-identified hospital employees, or reviews of <10 words.

RESULTS

50.0% (n=122) of reviews (N=244) were from patients and 38.1% (n=93) from friends or family members. Only 57.0% (n=139) of reviews mentioned any HCAHPS domain. Additional salient domains were: Financing, including unexpected out-of-pocket costs and difficult interactions with billing departments; system-centred care; and perceptions of safety. These domains were mentioned in 51.2% (n=125) of reviews. Friends and family members commented on perceptions of safety more frequently than patients.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial proportion of consumer reviews do not mention HCAHPS domains. Surrogates appear to observe care differently than patients, particularly around safety.

General Practitioners' Concerns About Online Patient Feedback: Findings From a Descriptive Exploratory Qualitative Study in England

Background

The growth in the volume of online patient feedback, including online patient ratings and comments, suggests that patients are embracing the opportunity to review online their experience of receiving health care. Very little is known about health care professionals’ attitudes toward online patient feedback and whether health care professionals are comfortable with the public nature of the feedback.

Objective

The aim of the overall study was to explore and describe general practitioners’ attitudes toward online patient feedback. This paper reports on the findings of one of the aims of the study, which was to explore and understand the concerns that general practitioners (GPs) in England have about online patient feedback. This could then be used to improve online patient feedback platforms and help to increase usage of online patient feedback by GPs and, by extension, their patients.

Methods

A descriptive qualitative approach using face-to-face semistructured interviews was used in this study. A topic guide was developed following a literature review and discussions with key stakeholders. GPs (N=20) were recruited from Cambridgeshire, London, and Northwest England through probability and snowball sampling. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed in NVivo using the framework method, a form of thematic analysis.

Results

Most participants in this study had concerns about online patient feedback. They questioned the validity of online patient feedback because of data and user biases and lack of representativeness, the usability of online patient feedback due to the feedback being anonymous, the transparency of online patient feedback because of the risk of false allegations and breaching confidentiality, and the resulting impact of all those factors on them, their professional practice, and their relationship with their patients.

Conclusions

The majority of GPs interviewed had reservations and concerns about online patient feedback and questioned its validity and usefulness among other things. Based on the findings from the study, recommendations for online patient feedback website providers in England are given. These include suggestions to make some specific changes to the platform and the need to promote online patient feedback more among both GPs and health care users, which may help to reduce some of the concerns raised by GPs about online patient feedback in this study.

The development of online doctor reviews in China: an analysis of the largest online doctor review website in China

BACKGROUND

Since the time of Web 2.0, more and more consumers have used online doctor reviews to rate their doctors or to look for a doctor. This phenomenon has received health care researchers' attention worldwide, and many studies have been conducted on online doctor reviews in the United States and Europe. But no study has yet been done in China. Also, in China, without a mature primary care physician recommendation system, more and more Chinese consumers seek online doctor reviews to look for a good doctor for their health care concerns.

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to examine the online doctor review practice in China, including addressing the following questions: (1) How many doctors and specialty areas are available for online review? (2) How many online reviews are there on those doctors? (3) What specialty area doctors are more likely to be reviewed or receive more reviews? (4) Are those reviews positive or negative?

METHODS

This study explores an empirical dataset from Good Doctor website, haodf.com—the earliest and largest online doctor review and online health care community website in China—from 2006 to 2014, to examine the stated research questions by using descriptive statistics, binary logistic regression, and multivariate linear regression.

RESULTS

The dataset from the Good Doctor website contained 314,624 doctors across China and among them, 112,873 doctors received 731,543 quantitative reviews and 772,979 qualitative reviews as of April 11, 2014. On average, 37% of the doctors had been reviewed on the Good Doctor website. Gynecology-obstetrics-pediatrics doctors were most likely to be reviewed, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.497 (95% CI 1.461-1.535), and internal medicine doctors were less likely to be reviewed, with an OR of 0.94 (95% CI 0.921-0.960), relative to the combined small specialty areas. Both traditional Chinese medicine doctors and surgeons were more likely to be reviewed than the combined small specialty areas, with an OR of 1.483 (95% CI 1.442-1.525) and an OR of 1.366 (95% CI 1.337-1.395), respectively. Quantitatively, traditional Chinese medicine doctors (P<.001) and gynecology-obstetrics-pediatrics doctors (P<.001) received more reviews than the combined small specialty areas. But internal medicine doctors received fewer reviews than the combined small specialty areas (P<.001). Also, the majority of quantitative reviews were positive-about 88% were positive for the doctors' treatment effect measure and 91% were positive for the bedside manner measure. This was the case for the four major specialty areas, which had the most number of doctors—internal medicine, gynecology-obstetrics-pediatrics, surgery, and traditional Chinese medicine.

CONCLUSIONS

Like consumers in the United States and Europe, Chinese consumers have started to use online doctor reviews. Similar to previous research on other countries' online doctor reviews, the online reviews in China covered almost every medical specialty, and most of the reviews were positive even though all of the reviewing procedures and the final available information were anonymous. The average number of reviews per rated doctor received in this dataset was 6, which was higher than that for doctors in the United States or Germany, probably because this dataset covered a longer time period than did the US or German dataset. But this number is still very small compared to any doctor's real patient population, and it cannot represent the reality of that population. Also, since all the data used for analysis were from one single website, the data might be biased and might not be a representative national sample of China.

Insights into the impact of online physician reviews on patients' decision making: randomized experiment

Background

Physician-rating websites combine public reporting with social networking and offer an attractive means by which users can provide feedback on their physician and obtain information about other patients’ satisfaction and experiences. However, research on how users evaluate information on these portals is still scarce and only little knowledge is available about the potential influence of physician reviews on a patient’s choice.

Objective

Starting from the perspective of prospective patients, this paper sets out to explore how certain characteristics of physician reviews affect the evaluation of the review and users’ attitudes toward the rated physician. We propose a model that relates review style and review number to constructs of review acceptance and check it with a Web-based experiment.

Methods

We employed a randomized 2x2 between-subject, factorial experiment manipulating the style of a physician review (factual vs emotional) and the number of reviews for a certain physician (low vs high) to test our hypotheses. A total of 168 participants were presented with a Web-based questionnaire containing a short description of a dentist search scenario and the manipulated reviews for a fictitious dental physician. To investigate the proposed hypotheses, we carried out moderated regression analyses and a moderated mediation analysis using the PROCESS macro 2.11 for SPSS version 22.

Results

Our analyses indicated that a higher number of reviews resulted in a more positive attitude toward the rated physician. The results of the regression model for attitude toward the physician suggest a positive main effect of the number of reviews (mean [low] 3.73, standard error [SE] 0.13, mean [high] 4.15, SE 0.13). We also observed an interaction effect with the style of the review—if the physician received only a few reviews, fact-oriented reviews (mean 4.09, SE 0.19) induced a more favorable attitude toward the physician compared to emotional reviews (mean 3.44, SE 0.19), but there was no such effect when the physician received many reviews. Furthermore, we found that review style also affected the perceived expertise of the reviewer. Fact-oriented reviews (mean 3.90, SE 0.13) lead to a higher perception of reviewer expertise compared to emotional reviews (mean 3.19, SE 0.13). However, this did not transfer to the attitude toward the physician. A similar effect of review style and number on the perceived credibility of the review was observed. While no differences between emotional and factual style were found if the physician received many reviews, a low number of reviews received lead to a significant difference in the perceived credibility, indicating that emotional reviews were rated less positively (mean 3.52, SE 0.18) compared to fact-oriented reviews (mean 4.15, SE 0.17). Our analyses also showed that perceived credibility of the review fully mediated the observed interaction effect on attitude toward the physician.

Conclusions

Physician-rating websites are an interesting new source of information about the quality of health care from the patient’s perspective. This paper makes a unique contribution to an understudied area of research by providing some insights into how people evaluate online reviews of individual doctors. Information attributes, such as review style and review number, have an impact on the evaluation of the review and on the patient’s attitude toward the rated doctor. Further research is necessary to improve our understanding of the influence of such rating sites on the patient's choice of a physician.

Parental awareness and use of online physician rating sites

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The US public is increasingly using online rating sites to make decisions about a variety of consumer goods and services, including physicians. We sought to understand, within the context of other types of rating sites, parents' awareness, perceptions, and use of physician-rating sites for choosing primary care physicians for their children.

METHODS

This cross-sectional, nationally representative survey of 3563 adults was conducted in September 2012. Participants were asked about rating Web sites in the context of finding a primary care physician for their children and about their previous experiences with such sites.

RESULTS

Overall, 2137 (60%) of participants completed the survey. Among these respondents, 1619 were parents who were included in the present analysis. About three-quarters (74%) of parents were aware of physician-rating sites, and about one-quarter (28%) had used them to select a primary care physician for their children. Based on 3 vignettes for which respondents were asked if they would follow a neighbor's recommendation about a primary care physician and using multivariate analyses, respondents exposed to a neighbor's recommendation and positive online physician ratings were significantly more likely to choose the recommended physician (adjusted odds ratio: 3.0 [95% confidence interval: 2.1-4.4]) than respondents exposed to the neighbor's recommendation alone. Conversely, respondents exposed to the neighbor's recommendation and negative online ratings were significantly less likely to choose the neighbor children's physician (adjusted odds ratio: 0.09 [95% confidence interval: 0.03-0.3]).

CONCLUSIONS

Parents are beginning to use online physician ratings, and these ratings have the potential to influence choices of their children's primary care physician.