Social media and rating sites as tools to understanding quality of care: a scoping review

How should medical society face patient feedback in online review platforms?

In the medical field, the importance of online reviews is escalating. However, the complexity of responding to these reviews is profound, as such anonymous critiques may encompass not only emotionally distressing content but also potentially malicious criticisms directed at healthcare professionals. While recognizing the vital role of patient feedback, there exists a necessity for a collective approach to managing online commentary. This effort seeks to strike a balance between patient satisfaction and the safeguarding of healthcare practitioners and administrative staff. We believe the global medical community must establish guidelines to effectively handle such scenarios, thereby contributing to the sustainability of patient-centered services.

Investigating Substance Use via Reddit: Systematic Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Reddit's (Reddit Inc) large user base, diverse communities, and anonymity make it a useful platform for substance use research. Despite a growing body of literature on substance use on Reddit, challenges and limitations must be carefully considered. However, no systematic scoping review has been conducted on the use of Reddit as a data source for substance use research.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to investigate the use of Reddit for studying substance use by examining previous studies' objectives, reasons, limitations, and methods for using Reddit. In addition, we discuss the implications and contributions of previous studies and identify gaps in the literature that require further attention.

METHODS

A total of 7 databases were searched using keyword combinations including Reddit and substance-related keywords in April 2022. The initial search resulted in 456 articles, and 227 articles remained after removing duplicates. All included studies were peer reviewed, empirical, available in full text, and pertinent to Reddit and substance use, and they were all written in English. After screening, 60 articles met the eligibility criteria for the review, with 57 articles identified from the initial database search and 3 from the ancestry search. A codebook was developed, and qualitative content analysis was performed to extract relevant evidence related to the research questions.

RESULTS

The use of Reddit for studying substance use has grown steadily since 2015, with a sharp increase in 2021. The primary objective was to identify tendencies and patterns in various types of substance use discussions (52/60, 87%). Reddit was also used to explore unique user experiences, propose methodologies, investigate user interactions, and develop interventions. A total of 9 reasons for using Reddit to study substance use were identified, such as the platform's anonymity, its widespread popularity, and the explicit topics of subreddits. However, 7 limitations were noted, including the platform's low representativeness of the general population with substance use and the lack of demographic information. Most studies use application programming interfaces for data collection and quantitative approaches for analysis, with few using qualitative approaches. Machine learning algorithms are commonly used for natural language processing tasks. The theoretical, methodological, and practical implications and contributions of the included articles are summarized and discussed. The most prevalent practical implications are investigating prevailing topics in Reddit discussions, providing recommendations for clinical practices and policies, and comparing Reddit discussions on substance use across various sources.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic scoping review provides an overview of Reddit's use as a data source for substance use research. Although the limitations of Reddit data must be considered, analyzing them can be useful for understanding patterns and user experiences related to substance use. Our review also highlights gaps in the literature and suggests avenues for future research.

Centricity on patients using healthcare reputation management strategies to improve dentistry image in Romania

Reputation is seen as an abstract concept that focuses on patients' perceptions of a particular medical institution. A good image of these practices among patients makes them return to them and also helps attract new patients and increase their reputation and revenue. The paper aimed to explore the respondents' perceptions of the way the image of online dental practices can influence their reputation management. For this purpose, a quantitative study was conducted on a sample of 107 respondents. Data collection was carried out using a questionnaire that was posted on an online platform. Data analysis was done by using IBM SPSS software. The results emphasized that patients think that the image of dental practices in the online environment can influence their reputation to a high extent.

Are online reviews of assisted living communities associated with patient-centered outcomes?

BACKGROUND

Existing literature on online reviews of healthcare providers generally portrays online reviews as a useful way to disseminate information on quality. However, it remains unknown whether online reviews for assisted living (AL) communities reflect AL care quality. This study examined the association between AL online review ratings and residents' home time, a patient-centered outcome.

METHODS

Medicare beneficiaries who entered AL communities in 2018 were identified. The main outcome is resident home time in the year following AL admission, calculated as the percentage of time spent at home (i.e., not in institutional care setting) per day being alive. Additional outcomes are the percentage of time spent in emergency room, inpatient hospital, nursing home, and inpatient hospice. AL online Google reviews for 2013-2017 were linked to 2018-2019 Medicare data. AL average rating score (ranging 1-5) and rating status (no-rating, low-rating, and high-rating) were generated using Google reviews. Linear regression models and propensity score weighting were used to examine the association between online reviews and outcomes. The study sample included 59,831 residents in 12,143 ALs.

RESULTS

Residents were predominately older (average 81.2 years), non-Hispanic White (90.4%), and female (62.9%), with 17% being dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid. From 2013 to 2017, ALs received an average rating of 4.1 on Google, with a standard deviation of 1.1. Each one-unit increase in the AL's average online rating was associated with an increase in residents' risk-adjusted home time by 0.33 percentage points (p < 0.001). Compared with residents in ALs without ratings, residents in high-rated ALs (average rating ≥4.4) had a 0.64 pp (p < 0.001) increase in home time.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher online rating scores were positively associated with residents' home time, while the absence of ratings was associated with reduced home time. Our results suggest that online reviews may be a quality signal with respect to home time.

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.

Web-Based Public Ratings of General Practitioners in Norway: Validation Study

BACKGROUND

Understanding the complex relationships among multiple strategies for gathering users' perspectives in the evaluation of the performance of services is crucial for the interpretation of user-reported measures.

OBJECTIVE

The main objectives were to (1) evaluate the psychometric performance of an 11-item web-based questionnaire of ratings of general practitioners (GPs) currently used in Norway (Legelisten.no) and (2) assess the association between web-based and survey-based patient experience indicators.

METHODS

We included all published ratings on GPs and practices on Legelisten.no in the period of May 5, 2012, to December 15, 2021 (N=76,521). The questionnaire consists of 1 mandatory item and 10 voluntary items with 5 response categories (1 to 5 stars), alongside an open-ended review question and background variables. Questionnaire dimensionality and internal consistency were assessed with Cronbach α, exploratory factor, and item response theory analyses, and a priori hypotheses were developed for assessing construct validity (chi-square analysis). We calculated Spearman correlations between web-based ratings and reference patient experience indicators based on survey data using the patient experiences with the GP questionnaire (n=5623 respondents for a random sample of 50 GPs).

RESULTS

Web-based raters were predominantly women (n=32,074, 64.0%), in the age range of 20-50 years (n=35,113, 74.6%), and reporting 5 or fewer consultations with the GP each year (n=28,798, 64.5%). Ratings were missing for 18.9% (n=14,500) to 27.4% (n=20,960) of nonmandatory items. A total of 4 of 11 rating items showed a U-shaped distribution, with >60% reporting 5 stars. Factor analysis and internal consistency testing identified 2 rating scales: "GP" (5 items; α=.98) and "practice" (6 items; α=.85). Some associations were not consistent with a priori hypotheses and allowed only partial confirmation of the construct validity of ratings. Item response theory analysis results were adequate for the "practice" scale but not for the "GP" scale, with items with inflated discrimination (>5) distributed over a narrow interval of the scale. The correlations between the web-based ratings GP scale and GP reference indicators ranged from 0.34 (P=.021) to 0.44 (P=.002), while the correlation between the web-based ratings practice scale and reference indicators ranged from 0.17 (not significant) to 0.49 (P<.001). The strongest correlations between web-based and survey scores were found for items measuring practice-related experiences: phone availability (ρ=0.51), waiting time in the office (ρ=0.62), other staff (ρ=0.54-0.58; P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The practice scale of the web-based ratings has adequate psychometric performance, while the GP suffers from important limitations. The associations with survey-based patient experience indicators were accordingly mostly weak to modest. Our study underlines the importance of interpreting web-based ratings with caution and the need to further develop rating sites.

Wisdom of the Experts Versus Opinions of the Crowd in Hospital Quality Ratings: Analysis of Hospital Compare Star Ratings and Google Star Ratings

Background

Popular web-based portals provide free and convenient access to user-generated hospital quality reviews. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) also publishes Hospital Compare Star Ratings (HCSR), a comprehensive expert rating of US hospital quality that aggregates multiple measures of quality. CMS revised the HCSR methods in 2021. It is important to analyze the degree to which web-based ratings reflect expert measures of hospital quality because easily accessible, crowdsourced hospital ratings influence consumers’ hospital choices.

Objective

This study aims to assess the association between web-based, Google hospital quality ratings that reflect the opinions of the crowd and HCSR representing the wisdom of the experts, as well as the changes in these associations following the 2021 revision of the CMS rating system.

Methods

We extracted Google star ratings using the Application Programming Interface in June 2020. The HCSR data of April 2020 (before the revision of HCSR methodology) and April 2021 (after the revision of HCSR methodology) were obtained from the CMS Hospital Compare website. We also extracted scores for the individual components of hospital quality for each of the hospitals in our sample using the code provided by Hospital Compare. Fractional response models were used to estimate the association between Google star ratings and HCSR as well as individual components of quality (n=2619).

Results

The Google star ratings are statistically associated with HCSR (P<.001) after controlling for hospital-level effects; however, they are not associated with clinical components of HCSR that require medical expertise for evaluation such as safety of care (P=.30) or readmission (P=.52). The revised CMS rating system ameliorates previous partial inconsistencies in the association between Google star ratings and quality component scores of HCSR.

Conclusions

Crowdsourced Google star hospital ratings are informative regarding expert CMS overall hospital quality ratings and individual quality components that are easier for patients to evaluate. Improvements in hospital quality metrics that require expertise to assess, such as safety of care and readmission, may not lead to improved Google star ratings. Hospitals can benefit from using crowdsourced ratings as timely and easily available indicators of their quality performance while recognizing their limitations and biases.

Exploring the Peer Effect of Physicians’ and Patients’ Participation Behavior: Evidence from Online Health Communities

Background: Little research has studied the peer effect of physicians and patients in online health communities (OHCs) simultaneously. The study investigates the impact of the focal physician’s peers (F-peers) on the focal physician (F-physician), and the impact of patients of the focal physician’s peers (F-P-patients) on the focal physician’s patients (F-patients). Moreover, based on brand extension and accessible–diagnosable theories, this study explores the moderating effects of the intensity of F-peers’ knowledge sharing behavior and department reputation. Methods: This study collects data of 3297 physicians and related patients from Haodf.com platform between January 2019 and December 2019. Both two-way fixed effect and panel negative binomial regression are adopted to quantify the effects. Results: Results show that the behavior of F-peers positively affects the behavior of the F-physician, while the behavior of F-P-patients positively affects the behavior of F-patients. Moreover, both the intensity of F-peers’ knowledge sharing behavior and department reputation have a compound moderating effect. Conclusions: This study contributes to the literature of peer effects by constructing the conceptual framework of different types of individual participation behaviors in OHCs. The findings offer practical guides for establishing an incentive mechanism and formulating peer incentives or competition strategies in OHCs.

Assessing the reliability of automatic sentiment analysis tools on rating the sentiment of reviews of NHS dental practices in England

Background

Online reviews may act as a rich source of data to assess the quality of dental practices. Assessing the content and sentiment of reviews on a large scale is time consuming and expensive. Automation of the process of assigning sentiment to big data samples of reviews may allow for reviews to be used as Patient Reported Experience Measures for primary care dentistry.

Aim

To assess the reliability of three different online sentiment analysis tools (Amazon Comprehend DetectSentiment API (ACDAPI), Google and Monkeylearn) at assessing the sentiment of reviews of dental practices working on National Health Service contracts in the United Kingdom.

Methods

A Python 3 script was used to mine 15800 reviews from 4803 unique dental practices on the NHS.uk websites between April 2018 –March 2019. A random sample of 270 reviews were rated by the three sentiment analysis tools. These reviews were rated by 3 blinded independent human reviewers and a pooled sentiment score was assigned. Kappa statistics and polychoric evalutaiton were used to assess the level of agreement. Disagreements between the automated and human reviewers were qualitatively assessed.

Results

There was good agreement between the sentiment assigned to reviews by the human reviews and ACDAPI (k = 0.660). The Google (k = 0.706) and Monkeylearn (k = 0.728) showed slightly better agreement at the expense of usability on a massive dataset. There were 33 disagreements in rating between ACDAPI and human reviewers, of which n = 16 were due to syntax errors, n = 10 were due to misappropriation of the strength of conflicting emotions and n = 7 were due to a lack of overtly emotive language in the text.

Conclusions

There is good agreement between the sentiment of an online review assigned by a group of humans and by cloud-based sentiment analysis. This may allow the use of automated sentiment analysis for quality assessment of dental service provision in the NHS.

Hospital Facebook Reviews Analysis Using a Machine Learning Sentiment Analyzer and Quality Classifier

While experts have recognised the significance and necessity of social media integration in healthcare, no systematic method has been devised in Malaysia or Southeast Asia to include social media input into the hospital quality improvement process. The goal of this work is to explain how to develop a machine learning system for classifying Facebook reviews of public hospitals in Malaysia by using service quality (SERVQUAL) dimensions and sentiment analysis. We developed a Machine Learning Quality Classifier (MLQC) based on the SERVQUAL model and a Machine Learning Sentiment Analyzer (MLSA) by manually annotated multiple batches of randomly chosen reviews. Logistic regression (LR), naive Bayes (NB), support vector machine (SVM), and other methods were used to train the classifiers. The performance of each classifier was tested using 5-fold cross validation. For topic classification, the average F1-score was between 0.687 and 0.757 for all models. In a 5-fold cross validation of each SERVQUAL dimension and in sentiment analysis, SVM consistently outperformed other methods. The study demonstrates how to use supervised learning to automatically identify SERVQUAL domains and sentiments from patient experiences on a hospital's Facebook page. Malaysian healthcare providers can gather and assess data on patient care via the use of these content analysis technology to improve hospital quality of care.

Patient perception of scoliosis correction surgery on Instagram

OBJECTIVE

Patient feedback surveys provide important insight into patient outcomes, satisfaction, and perioperative needs. Recent critiques have questioned provider-initiated surveys and their capacity to accurately gauge patient perspectives due to intrinsic biases created by question framing. In this study, the authors sought to evaluate provider-independent, patient-controlled social media Instagram posts in order to better understand the patient experience following scoliosis correction surgery.

METHODS

Twitter and Instagram were queried for posts with two tagged indicators, #scoliosissurgery or @scoliosissurgery, resulting in no relevant Twitter posts and 25,000 Instagram posts. Of the initial search, 24,500 Instagram posts that did not directly involve the patient's own experience were eliminated. Posts were analyzed and coded for the following criteria: the gender of the patient, preoperative or postoperative timing discussed in the post, and classified themes related to the patient's experiences with scoliosis correction surgery.

RESULTS

Females made 87.6% of the Instagram posts about their experience following scoliosis correction surgery. The initial postoperative stage of surgery was mentioned in 7.6% of Instagram posts. The most common theme on Instagram involved offering or seeking online support from other patients, which constituted 85.2% of all posts. Other common themes included concern about the surgical scar (31.8%), discussing the results of treatment (28.8%), and relief regarding results (21.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Social media provided a platform to analyze unprompted feedback from patients. Patients were most concerned with their scoliosis correction surgery in the period of time 2 weeks or more after surgery. Themes that were most commonly found on Instagram posts were offering or seeking online support from other patients and concern about the surgical scar. Patient-controlled social media platforms, like Instagram, may provide a useful mechanism for healthcare providers to understand the patient experience following scoliosis correction surgery. Such platforms may help in evaluating postoperative satisfaction and improving postoperative quality of care.

Professional Internet Presence Amongst Endocrine Surgeons in the United States

BACKGROUND

There is a wide range of social media adoption within medical specialties. The use of social media by endocrine surgeons has not been investigated. We undertook this study to describe the use of social media and other platforms by endocrine surgeons.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The American Association of Endocrine Surgeons' publicly available website was used to identify practicing endocrine surgeons in the United States. Surgeon demographics and practice characteristics were collected via internet query. Five social media platforms (Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube) were investigated for professional accounts. The presence of a non-institutional professional website, an active Healthgrades account, and presence in non-institutional YouTube videos were also queried. One point was assigned for presence on each of the eight platforms. A professional internet presence (PIP) score was calculated. Descriptive statistics were performed on PIP scores to evaluate the relationship between surgeon and practice characteristics and PIP score.

RESULTS

A total of 417 endocrine surgeons were studied. LinkedIn (222, 53.2%) and Twitter (110, 26.4%) were the most commonly used platforms. PIP scores were categorized into zero, one, two, and three or more accounts; 26.9% of surgeons had no professional internet presence. Academic surgeons had a significantly different PIP score than community-based surgeons (P < 0.01). There was no significant association between PIP score and surgeon sex, geographic regions, rural versus urban settings, and years of experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Self-identified US endocrine surgeons have low professional internet presence. Endocrine surgeons may consider bolstering their professional internet presence to disseminate medical information.

Assessing Patient-Perceived Hospital Service Quality and Sentiment in Malaysian Public Hospitals Using Machine Learning and Facebook Reviews

Social media is emerging as a new avenue for hospitals and patients to solicit input on the quality of care. However, social media data is unstructured and enormous in volume. Moreover, no empirical research on the use of social media data and perceived hospital quality of care based on patient online reviews has been performed in Malaysia. The purpose of this study was to investigate the determinants of positive sentiment expressed in hospital Facebook reviews in Malaysia, as well as the association between hospital accreditation and sentiments expressed in Facebook reviews. From 2017 to 2019, we retrieved comments from 48 official public hospitals' Facebook pages. We used machine learning to build a sentiment analyzer and service quality (SERVQUAL) classifier that automatically classifies the sentiment and SERVQUAL dimensions. We utilized logistic regression analysis to determine our goals. We evaluated a total of 1852 reviews and our machine learning sentiment analyzer detected 72.1% of positive reviews and 27.9% of negative reviews. We classified 240 reviews as tangible, 1257 reviews as trustworthy, 125 reviews as responsive, 356 reviews as assurance, and 1174 reviews as empathy using our machine learning SERVQUAL classifier. After adjusting for hospital characteristics, all SERVQUAL dimensions except Tangible were associated with positive sentiment. However, no significant relationship between hospital accreditation and online sentiment was discovered. Facebook reviews powered by machine learning algorithms provide valuable, real-time data that may be missed by traditional hospital quality assessments. Additionally, online patient reviews offer a hitherto untapped indication of quality that may benefit all healthcare stakeholders. Our results confirm prior studies and support the use of Facebook reviews as an adjunct method for assessing the quality of hospital services in Malaysia.

A good dentist or not: understanding the role of storytelling in online dentist reviews

Purpose

Narrative comments about dentists on physician review sites have been documented to increasingly influence people's selection of their dentists. From a communication standpoint, these comments are a type of narrative communication that people share their experiences with dentists by telling stories. Based on the frameworks of rhetoric structure theory and extended elaborated likelihood model, this study aimed to examine the effects of such storytelling from two perspectives including narrative structure and narrative focus.

Design/methodology/approach

A 4 (narrative structure) × 2 (narrative focus) between-subjects experiment was conducted to examine the proposed hypotheses and research questions

Findings

The results showed that a one-sided comprehensive comment focusing on technical competence generated the strongest persuasion effects measured by attitude and behavioral intention. These effects were mediated by perceived narrative credibility and enjoyment.

Originality/value

This study contributes to the extant literature in two ways. First, it extends previous studies of online narrative comments by showing which narrative structure and focus are deemed to be more persuasive when selecting a dentist. Second, it offers a test of two routes of information processing (i.e. cognitive and experiential) to understand the mechanism underlying the effects of narrative comments.

Peer review

The peer-review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-08-2020-0359

Aggressions on Social Networks: What Are the Implications for Healthcare Providers? An Exploratory Research

Incidents of violence by healthcare users against staff have been considered as sentinel events. New forms of aggression, i.e., cyberbullying, have emerged with the advent of social networks. Medical literature includes some reports about workplace cyberbullying on nurses and young doctors by colleagues/supervisors, but not by users. To investigate cyberbullying on healthcare providers via social networks, we carried out an exploratory quali-quantitative study, researching and analyzing posts and comments relating to a local Health Trust (ASL5) in Italy, published from 2013 until May 2020 on healthcare worker aggressions on social networks on every local community's Facebook page. We developed a thematic matrix through an analysis of the most recurring meaning categories (framework method). We collected 217 texts (25 posts and 192 comments): 26% positive and 74% negative. Positive posts were shared about ten times more than negative ones. Negative comments received about double the "Likes" than the positive ones. Analysis highlighted three main meaning categories: 1. lack of adequate and functional structures; 2. negative point of view (POV) towards some departments; 3. positive POV towards others. No significant differences were observed between the various categories of healthcare workers (HCW). Geriatric, medical wards and emergency department were the most frequent targets of negative comments. All the texts referred to first-line operators except for one. Online violence against HCW is a real, largely unknown, problem that needs immediate and concrete attention for its potentially disastrous consequences. Compared to traditional face-to-face bullying, it can be more dangerous as it is contagious and diffusive, without spatial, temporal or personal boundaries.

Associations of Health Literacy, Social Media Use, and Self-Efficacy With Health Information-Seeking Intentions Among Social Media Users in China: Cross-sectional Survey

BACKGROUND

Empirical research has demonstrated that people frequently use social media for gathering and sharing online health information. Health literacy, social media use, and self-efficacy are important factors that may influence people's health behaviors online.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to examine the associations between health literacy, health-related social media use, self-efficacy, and health behavioral intentions online.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of adults 18 years and older (n=449) to examine predictors of health-related behavioral intentions online including health literacy, social media use, and self-efficacy in China using 2 moderated mediation models. Mediation and moderation analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Self-efficacy mediated the effects of health literacy (Bindirect=0.213, 95% CI 0.101 to 0.339) and social media use (Bindirect=0.023, 95% CI 0.008 to 0.045) on health behavioral intentions on social media. Age moderated the effects of health literacy on self-efficacy (P=.03), while previous experience moderated the effects of social media use on self-efficacy (P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Health literacy and health-related social media use influenced health behavioral intentions on social media via their prior effects on self-efficacy. The association between health literacy and self-efficacy was stronger among younger respondents, whereas the association between health-related social media use and self-efficacy was stronger among those who previously had positive experiences with health information on social media. Health practitioners should target self-efficacy among older populations and increase positive media experience related to health.

The Use of Social Media by Healthcare Quality Personnel in Saudi Arabia

Purpose

The objective of this research was to investigate the use of social media for educational purposes by healthcare quality personnel in Saudi Arabia. Participants and Methods. A cross-sectional design study was carried out with 78 healthcare quality employees working in different hospitals in Saudi Arabia. The survey was distributed through WhatsApp, and the data were collected during November 2019. The results were analyzed and expressed in percentages using basic statistic tools.

Results

More than half of the participants (74.36%) were under 40 years old, and the gender was equally distributed among them. The participants used the following social media in decreasing order for educational purposes: YouTube, Twitter, LinkedIn, Snapchat, Instagram, and Facebook. The largest proportion of them employed YouTube, and the least used social media network was Facebook. The majority of them (58.87%) employed these platforms more than 3 hours daily. Most respondents (82%) agreed that social media can be used to educate on healthcare quality topics, and YouTube was the preferred platform for this goal. The reasons for using social media for professional purposes were networking (27%), education and professional development (24%), and health promotion (13%). Most of the responses considered that social media networks were somehow helpful and very helpful for improving knowledge about the profession (96.20%), improving creativity (90%), improving decision making (83.33%), improving critical skills (80.77%), and improving problem-solving abilities (79.49%).

Conclusion

The findings showed that a high percentage of the healthcare quality personnel in Saudi Arabia used social media for educational purposes, and the most used platform for this objective was YouTube. The results suggested that social media can be potentially useful to perceive healthcare quality in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Association Between Web-Based Physician Ratings and Physician Disciplinary Convictions: Retrospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Physician rating websites are commonly used by the public, yet the relationship between web-based physician ratings and health care quality is not well understood.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study was to use physician disciplinary convictions as an extreme marker for poor physician quality and to investigate whether disciplined physicians have lower ratings than nondisciplined matched controls.

METHODS

This was a retrospective national observational study of all disciplined physicians in Canada (751 physicians, 2000 to 2013). We searched ratings (2005-2015) from the country's leading online physician rating website for this group, and for 751 matched controls according to gender, specialty, practice years, and location. We compared overall ratings (out of a score of 5) as well as mean ratings by the type of misconduct. We also compared ratings for each type of misconduct and punishment.

RESULTS

There were 62.7% (471/751) of convicted and disciplined physicians (cases) with web-based ratings and 64.6% (485/751) of nondisciplined physicians (controls) with ratings. Of 312 matched case-control pairs, disciplined physicians were rated lower than controls overall (3.62 vs 4.00; P<.001). Disciplined physicians had lower ratings for all types of misconduct and punishment-except for physicians disciplined for sexual offenses (n=90 pairs; 3.83 vs 3.86; P=.81). Sexual misconduct was the only category in which mean ratings for physicians were higher than those for other disciplined physicians (3.63 vs 3.35; P=.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians convicted for disciplinary misconduct generally had lower web-based ratings. Physicians convicted of sexual misconduct did not have lower ratings and were rated higher than other disciplined physicians. These findings may have future implications for the identification of physicians providing poor-quality care.

Association of Online Consumer Reviews of Skilled Nursing Facilities With Patient Rehospitalization Rates

Importance

There are areas of skilled nursing facility (SNF) experience of importance to the public that are not currently included in public reporting initiatives on SNF quality. Whether patients, hospitals, and payers can leverage the information available from unsolicited online reviews to reduce avoidable rehospitalizations from SNFs is unknown.

Objectives

To assess the association between rehospitalization rates and online ratings of SNFs; to compare the association of rehospitalization with ratings from a review website vs Medicare Nursing Home Compare (NHC) ratings; and to identify specific topics consistently reported in reviews of SNFs with the highest vs lowest rehospitalization rates using natural language processing.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective cross-sectional study of 1536 SNFs with online reviews on Yelp (a website that allows consumers to rate and review businesses and services, scored on a 1- to 5-star rating scale, with 1 star indicating the lowest rating and 5 stars indicating the highest rating) posted between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2018. The combined data set included 1536 SNFs with 8548 online reviews, NHC ratings, and readmission rates.

Main Outcomes and Measures

A mean rating from the review website was calculated through the end of each year. Risk-standardized rehospitalization rates were obtained from NHC. Linear regression was used to measure the association between the rehospitalization rate of a SNF and the online ratings. Natural language processing was used to identify topics associated with reviews of SNFs in the top and bottom quintiles of rehospitalization rates.

Results

The 1536 SNFs in the sample had a median of 6 reviews (interquartile range, 3-13 reviews), with a mean (SD) review website rating of 2.7 (1.1). The SNFs with the highest rating on both the review website and NHC had 2.0% lower rehospitalization rates compared with the SNFs with the lowest rating on both websites (21.3%; 95% CI, 20.7%-21.8%; vs 23.3%; 95% CI, 22.7%-24.0%; P = .04). Compared with the NHC ratings alone, review website ratings were associated with an additional 0.4% of the variation in rehospitalization rates across SNFs (adjusted R2 = 0.009 vs adjusted R2 = 0.013; P = .003). Thematic analysis of qualitative comments on the review website for SNFs with high vs low rehospitalization rates identified several areas of importance to the reviewers, such as the quality of physical infrastructure and equipment, staff attitudes and communication with caregivers.

Conclusions and Relevance

Skilled nursing facilities with the best rating on both a review website and NHC had slightly lower rehospitalization rates than SNFs with the best rating on NHC alone. However, there was marked variation in the volume of reviews, and many SNF characteristics were underrepresented. Further refinement of the review process is warranted.

Online patient feedback as a measure of quality in primary care: a multimethod study using correlation and qualitative analysis

OBJECTIVES

To ascertain the relationship between online patient feedback and the General Practice Patient Survey (GPPS) and the Friends and Family Test (FFT). To consider the potential benefit it may add by describing the content of public reviews found on NHS Choices for all general practices in one Clinical Commissioning Group in England.

DESIGN

Multimethod study using correlation and thematic analysis.

SETTING

1396 public online reviews and ratings on NHS Choices for all General Practices (n=70) in Oxfordshire Clinical Commissioning Group in England.

RESULTS

Significant moderate correlations were found between the online patient feedback and the GPPS and the FFT. Three themes were developed through the qualitative analysis: (1) online feedback largely provides positive reinforcement for practice staff; (2) online feedback is used as a platform for suggesting service organisation and delivery improvements; (3) online feedback can be a source of insight into patients' expectations of care. These themes illustrate the wide range of topics commented on by patients, including their medical care, relationships with various members of staff, practice facilities, amenities and services in primary care settings.

CONCLUSIONS

This multimethod study demonstrates that online feedback found on NHS Choices is significantly correlated with established measures of quality in primary care. This suggests it has a potential use in understanding patient experience and satisfaction, and a potential use in quality improvement and patient safety. The qualitative analysis shows that this form of feedback contains helpful information about patients' experiences of general practice that provide insight into issues of quality and patient safety relevant to primary care. Health providers should offer patients multiple ways of offering feedback, including online, and should have systems in place to respond to and act on this feedback.

What Patients Value in Physicians: Analyzing Drivers of Patient Satisfaction Using Physician-Rating Website Data

BACKGROUND

Customer-oriented health care management and patient satisfaction have become important for physicians to attract patients in an increasingly competitive environment. Satisfaction influences patients' choice of physician and leads to higher patient retention and higher willingness to engage in positive word of mouth. In addition, higher satisfaction has positive effects on patients' willingness to follow the advice given by the physician. In recent years, physician-rating websites (PRWs) have emerged in the health care sector and are increasingly used by patients. Patients' usage includes either posting an evaluation to provide feedback to others about their own experience with a physician or reading evaluations of other patients before choosing a physician. The emergence of PRWs offers new avenues to analyze patient satisfaction and its key drivers. PRW data enable both satisfaction analyses and implications on the level of the individual physician as well as satisfaction analyses and implications on an overall level.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to identify linear and nonlinear effects of patients' perceived quality of physician appointment service attributes on the overall evaluation measures that are published on PRWs.

METHODS

We analyzed large-scale survey data from a German PRW containing 84,680 surveys of patients rating a total of 7038 physicians on 24 service attributes and 4 overall evaluation measures. Elasticities are estimated from regression models with perceived attribute quality as explanatory variables and overall evaluation measures as dependent variables. Depending on the magnitude of the elasticity, service attributes are classified into 3 categories: attributes with diminishing, constant, or increasing returns to overall evaluation.

RESULTS

The proposed approach revealed new insights into what patients value when visiting physicians and what they take for granted. Improvements in the physicians' pleasantness and friendliness have increasing returns to the publicly available overall evaluation (b=1.26). The practices' cleanliness (b=1.05) and the communication behavior of a physician during a visit (b level between .97 and 1.03) have constant returns. Indiscretion in the waiting rooms, extended waiting times, and a lack of modernity of the medical equipment (b level between .46 and .59) have the strongest diminishing returns to overall evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

The categorization of the service attributes supports physicians in identifying potential for improvements and prioritizing resource allocation to improve the publicly available overall evaluation ratings on PRWs. Thus, the study contributes to patient-centered health care management and, furthermore, promotes the utility of PRWs through large-scale data analysis.

WeChatting for Health: An Examination of the Relationship between Motivations and Active Engagement

As one of the largest mobile social media in the world, WeChat holds great potential for promoting health. Users not only seek and exchange health information on WeChat but also fulfill their health-related needs afforded by the platform. Using the two-step procedure common in uses and gratifications research, in-depth interviews were conducted with 18 WeChat users to explore their motivations for health-related uses on the platform, which were further rated by 522 WeChat users in China through a national wide online survey. Exploratory factor analysis identified five motivations: information seeking, building self-agency, social interaction, technological convenience, and self-expression. A series of hierarchical regression analyses reveals that social interaction is the best predictor of healthcare information engagement on WeChat, followed by building self-agency, information needs, and self-expression. The findings of this study contribute to the understanding of the psychological antecedents of using mobile social media for health-related purposes and the subsequent active behavior responses.

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.

Online physician reviews: is there a place for them?

Web-based physician ratings are increasingly popular but imperfect proxies for clinical competence. Yet they provide valuable information to patients and providers when taken in proper context. Providers need to embrace the reviews and use them to enact positive change in order to improve the quality of our patients’ experience. Patients need to realize the limitations of online ratings, particularly with smaller sample size and be discerning about the reasons behind the review.

Predicting HCAHPS scores from hospitals' social media pages: A sentiment analysis

BACKGROUND

Social media is an important communication channel that can help hospitals and consumers obtain feedback about quality of care. However, despite the potential value of insight from consumers who post comments about hospital care on social media, there has been little empirical research on the relationship between patients' anecdotal feedback and formal measures of patient experience.

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to test the association between informal feedback posted in the Reviews section of hospitals' Facebook pages and scores on two global items from the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey, Overall Hospital Rating and Willingness to Recommend the Hospital.

METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

We retrieved star ratings and anecdotal comments posted in Reviews sections of 131 hospitals' Facebook pages. Using a machine learning algorithm, we analyzed 57,985 comments to measure consumers' sentiment about the hospitals. We used regression analysis to determine whether consumers' quantitative and qualitative postings would predict global measures from the HCAHPS survey.

RESULTS

Both number of stars and the number of positive comments posted on hospitals' Facebook Reviews sections were associated with higher overall ratings and willingness to recommend the hospital. The findings suggest that patients' informal comments help predict a hospital's formal measures of patient experience.

CONCLUSION

Consistent with crowd wisdom, ordinary consumers may have valid insights that can help others to assess patient experience at a hospital. Given that some people will judge hospital quality based on opinions voiced in social media, further research should continue to explore associations between anecdotal commentary and a variety of quality indicators.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Administrators can tap into the wealth of commentary on social media as the forum continues to expand its influence in health care. Comments on social media may also serve as an early snapshot of patient-reported experiences, alerting administrators to problems that may appear in subsequent HCAHPS survey results.

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)

Online physician ratings fail to predict actual performance on measures of quality, value, and peer review

Objective

Patients use online consumer ratings to identify high-performing physicians, but it is unclear if ratings are valid measures of clinical performance. We sought to determine whether online ratings of specialist physicians from 5 platforms predict quality of care, value of care, and peer-assessed physician performance.

Materials and Methods

We conducted an observational study of 78 physicians representing 8 medical and surgical specialties. We assessed the association of consumer ratings with specialty-specific performance scores (metrics including adherence to Choosing Wisely measures, 30-day readmissions, length of stay, and adjusted cost of care), primary care physician peer-review scores, and administrator peer-review scores.

Results

Across ratings platforms, multivariable models showed no significant association between mean consumer ratings and specialty-specific performance scores (β-coefficient range, -0.04, 0.04), primary care physician scores (β-coefficient range, -0.01, 0.3), and administrator scores (β-coefficient range, -0.2, 0.1). There was no association between ratings and score subdomains addressing quality or value-based care. Among physicians in the lowest quartile of specialty-specific performance scores, only 5%-32% had consumer ratings in the lowest quartile across platforms. Ratings were consistent across platforms; a physician's score on one platform significantly predicted his/her score on another in 5 of 10 comparisons.

Discussion

Online ratings of specialist physicians do not predict objective measures of quality of care or peer assessment of clinical performance. Scores are consistent across platforms, suggesting that they jointly measure a latent construct that is unrelated to performance.

Conclusion

Online consumer ratings should not be used in isolation to select physicians, given their poor association with clinical performance.

The Effect of Online Effort and Reputation of Physicians on Patients' Choice: 3-Wave Data Analysis of China's Good Doctor Website

Background

Nowadays, patients are seeking physician information more frequently via the internet. Physician-rating websites (PRWs) have been recognized as the most convenient way to gain insight and detailed information about specific physicians before receiving consultation. However, little is known about how the information provided on PRWs may affect patients’ decisions to seek medical advice.

Objective

This study aimed to examine whether the physicians’ online efforts and their reputation have a relationship with patients’ choice of physician on PRWs.

Methods

A model, based on social exchange theory, was developed to analyze the factors associated with the number of online patients. A 3-wave data collection exercise, covering 4037 physicians on China’s Good Doctor website, was conducted during the months of February, April, and June 2017. Increases in consultation in a 60-day period were used as the dependent variable, whereas 2 series of data were analyzed using linear regression modeling. The fixed-effect model was used to analyze the 3-wave data.

Results

The adjusted R² value in the linear regression models were 0.28 and 0.27, whereas in the fixed-effect model, it was .30. Both the linear regression and fixed-effect models yielded a good fit. A positive effect of physicians’ effort on the aggregated number of online patients was identified in all models (R²=0.30 and R²=0.37 in 2 regression models; R²=0.23 in fixed effect model; P<.001). The proxies of physicians’ reputations indicated different results, with total number of page views of physicians’ homepages (R²=0.43 and R²=0.46; R²=0.16; P<.001) and number of votes received (R²=0.33 and R²=0.27; R²=0.43; P<.001) being seen as positive. Virtual gifts were not significant in all models, whereas thank-you messages were only significant in the fixed-effect model (R²=0.11; P=.02). The effort made by physicians online is positively associated with their aggregated number of patients consulted, whereas the effect of a physician’s reputation remains uncertain. The control effect of a physician’s title and hospital’s level was not significant in all linear regressions.

Conclusions

Both the effort and reputation of physicians online contribute to the increased number of online patients’ consultation; however, the influence of a physician’s reputation varies. This may imply that physicians’ online effort and reputation are critical in attracting patients and that strategic manipulation of physician profiles is worthy of study. Practical insights are also discussed.

Combating Vaccine Hesitancy: Teaching the Next Generation to Navigate Through the Post Truth Era

Despite scientific evidence supporting the fact that vaccines are fundamental tools for preventing infectious diseases, a percentage of the population still refuses some or all of them. Vaccine hesitancy has become a widespread issue, and its complexity lies in the great variety of factors that can influence decisions about immunization, which are not just vaccine-related concerns, but also involve personal and societal levels. Our research group performed an extensive literature review to analyze: (1) different age groups, their relation to the problem and their characteristics; (2) the most important information (key messages) about immunization that could be used to counteract hesitancy; and (3) best approaches to transmit the messages to the target groups. We propose a long-term approach to overcome vaccine hesitancy that involves the education of children and adolescents on the basics about immunization and critical thinking, using different communication channels.

Comprehensive scoping review of health research using social media data

INTRODUCTION

The rising popularity of social media, since their inception around 20 years ago, has been echoed in the growth of health-related research using data derived from them. This has created a demand for literature reviews to synthesise this emerging evidence base and inform future activities. Existing reviews tend to be narrow in scope, with limited consideration of the different types of data, analytical methods and ethical issues involved. There has also been a tendency for research to be siloed within different academic communities (eg, computer science, public health), hindering knowledge translation. To address these limitations, we will undertake a comprehensive scoping review, to systematically capture the broad corpus of published, health-related research based on social media data. Here, we present the review protocol and the pilot analyses used to inform it.

METHODS

A version of Arksey and O'Malley's five-stage scoping review framework will be followed: (1) identifying the research question; (2) identifying the relevant literature; (3) selecting the studies; (4) charting the data and (5) collating, summarising and reporting the results. To inform the search strategy, we developed an inclusive list of keyword combinations related to social media, health and relevant methodologies. The frequency and variability of terms were charted over time and cross referenced with significant events, such as the advent of Twitter. Five leading health, informatics, business and cross-disciplinary databases will be searched: PubMed, Scopus, Association of Computer Machinery, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers and Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, alongside the Google search engine. There will be no restriction by date.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The review focuses on published research in the public domain therefore no ethics approval is required. The completed review will be submitted for publication to a peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary open access journal, and conferences on public health and digital research.

Benchmarking life quality support interventions in long-term care using the Long-Term Care Quality of Life scale

We aimed to develop a graphical procedure for benchmarking quality of life care results using the Long-Term Care Quality of Life (LTC-QoL) scale. While clinical care quality benchmarking is now well established, similar research for quality of life (QOL) aged care benchmarking has received scant attention. Data from 10 facilities utilizing the LTC-QoL scale were analysed to establish baseline statistics for developing a graphical procedure for QOL benchmarking. Client LTC-QoL records were tested with varimax rotation factor analysis revealing three viable benchmarking themes: B1 (Self-efficacy), B2 (supporting relationships), and B3 (outlook on life) were selected for benchmark development utilizing Analysis of Means to generate graphical outputs using Minitab version 17.3.1. In this way, in the absence of verified industry standards, it is possible to compare organizations providing similar services using the same indicators, against group averages. In conclusion, the benchmarking protocol produced comparative information on three benchmarks for 10 facilities. Similar analysis is feasible for a single facility over time. The results of these analyses provide evidence for on-site discussion of quality of life care quality performance.

Using Twitter to Examine Web-Based Patient Experience Sentiments in the United States: Longitudinal Study

Background

There are documented differences in access to health care across the United States. Previous research indicates that Web-based data regarding patient experiences and opinions of health care are available from Twitter. Sentiment analyses of Twitter data can be used to examine differences in patient views of health care across the United States.

Objective

The objective of our study was to provide a characterization of patient experience sentiments across the United States on Twitter over a 4-year period.

Methods

Using data from Twitter, we developed a set of 4 software components to automatically label and examine a database of tweets discussing patient experience. The set includes a classifier to determine patient experience tweets, a geolocation inference engine for social data, a modified sentiment classifier, and an engine to determine if the tweet is from a metropolitan or nonmetropolitan area in the United States. Using the information retrieved, we conducted spatial and temporal examinations of tweet sentiments at national and regional levels. We examined trends in the time of the day and that of the week when tweets were posted. Statistical analyses were conducted to determine if any differences existed between the discussions of patient experience in metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas.

Results

We collected 27.3 million tweets between February 1, 2013 and February 28, 2017, using a set of patient experience-related keywords; the classifier was able to identify 2,759,257 tweets labeled as patient experience. We identified the approximate location of 31.76% (876,384/2,759,257) patient experience tweets using a geolocation classifier to conduct spatial analyses. At the national level, we observed 27.83% (243,903/876,384) positive patient experience tweets, 36.22% (317,445/876,384) neutral patient experience tweets, and 35.95% (315,036/876,384) negative patient experience tweets. There were slight differences in tweet sentiments across all regions of the United States during the 4-year study period. We found the average sentiment polarity shifted toward less negative over the study period across all the regions of the United States. We observed the sentiment of tweets to have a lower negative fraction during daytime hours, whereas the sentiment of tweets posted between 8 pm and 10 am had a higher negative fraction. Nationally, sentiment scores for tweets in metropolitan areas were found to be more extremely negative and mildly positive compared with tweets in nonmetropolitan areas. This result is statistically significant (P<.001). Tweets with extremely negative sentiments had a medium effect size (d=0.34) at the national level.

Conclusions

This study presents methodologies for a deeper understanding of Web-based discussion related to patient experience across space and time and demonstrates how Twitter can provide a unique and unsolicited perspective from users on the health care they receive in the United States.

Why are so few patients rating their physicians on German physician rating websites? A qualitative study

Background

Physician rating websites (PRWs) allow patients to rate, comment and discuss physicians’ quality online as a source of information for others searching for a physician. It is generally assumed that PRWs will only be helpful for users, and fair for the rated, if there are a high number of ratings. However, the number of ratings on PRWs remains low internationally and there is currently a lack of research examining the reasons why patients are not rating their physicians. The aim of this study is to therefore identify the spectrum of factors influencing people’s willingness to rate their physician on PRWs.

Methods

A mailed cross-sectional survey sent to a random sample from 4 North German cities between April and July 2016. Fifty participants who had previously used PRWs but not rated a physician provided reasons for why that had not rated a physician in a free text response. Semi-structured qualitative telephone interviews were then conducted with 22 interested participants to explore factors influencing their willingness to rate their physician on PRWs in more detail.

Results

Participants identified a total of 21 distinct incentives and disincentives for rating physicians on PRWs, which could be further categorised under the headings: user-specific, PRW-specific and physician-specific. Two key overarching groups of factors emerged: (1) factors concerning the physician-patient relationship, and (2) factors issues regarding technical aspects of PRWs.

Conclusion

These findings will be helpful in guiding future research and health policy initiatives to increase the usefulness and fairness of PRWs.

Public Awareness, Usage, and Predictors for the Use of Doctor Rating Websites: Cross-Sectional Study in England

BACKGROUND

With the advent and popularity of social media and consumer rating websites, as well as the emergence of the digitally engaged patient, there has been an increased interest in doctor rating websites or online patient feedback websites, both inside and outside academia. However, there is very little known about how the public across England views such rating websites as a mode to give patient experience feedback.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the overall study was to measure and understand public awareness, usage, and attitudes towards doctor rating websites as a mode to give experiential feedback about GPs in general practice in England. This paper reports on the findings of one of the aims of the study, which was to measure public awareness, current usage and future consideration of usage of online patient feedback websites, within the context of other feedback methods, This could allow the value of online patient feedback websites to be determined from the patients' perspective.

METHODS

A mixed methods population questionnaire was designed, validated and implemented face-to-face using a cross-sectional design with a representative sample of the public (n=844) in England. The results of the questionnaire were analyzed using chi-square tests, binomial logistic regressions, and content analysis. The qualitative results will be reported elsewhere.

RESULTS

Public awareness of online patient feedback websites as a channel to leave experiential feedback about GPs was found to be low at 15.2% (128/844). However, usage and future consideration to use online patient feedback websites were found to be extremely low, with current patient usage at just 0.4% (3/844), and patient intention to use online patient feedback in the future at 17.8% (150/844). Furthermore, only 4.0-5.0% of those who would consider leaving feedback about a GP in the future selected doctor rating websites as their most preferred method; more than half of patients said they would consider leaving feedback about GPs using another method, but not using an online patient feedback website.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that online patient feedback websites may not be an effective channel for collecting feedback on patient experience in general practice. Feedback on online patient feedback websites is not likely to be representative of the patient experience in the near future, challenging the use of online patient feedback not just as a mode for collecting patient experience data, but for patient choice and monitoring too. We recommend the National Health Service channels its investment and resources towards providing more direct and private feedback methods in general practice (such as opportunities for face-to-face feedback, email-based feedback, and web-based private feedback forms), as these are currently much more likely to be used by the majority of patients in England.

Patients' Awareness, Usage and Impact of Hospital Report Cards in the US

BACKGROUND

Little knowledge is available about the importance of hospital report cards in the US from the patients' perspective. It also remains unknown whether specific report cards with a stronger emphasis on clinical measures have a greater impact on hospital choice than general report cards that focus on online-derived ratings.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the awareness and usage of hospital report cards as well as their impact on hospital choice in the US.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study by surveying a stratified online sample (N = 1332) to ensure representativeness to the US online population (February 2015).

RESULTS

Overall, 75% of all respondents (mean age 45.4 years; 54% female) were aware of hospital report cards. Among these, 56% had used a report card to search for a hospital, and 80% of report card users stated having been influenced by a report card. Both the awareness and usage of general report cards were shown to be higher than for specific report cards. No significant differences could be detected regarding the impact between general or specific report cards on hospital choice.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that hospital report cards play a considerable role among patients when searching for a hospital in the US; however, patients do not seem to have a preference regarding the type of report cards they use when selecting a hospital.

How Online Quality Ratings Influence Patients' Choice of Medical Providers: Controlled Experimental Survey Study

Background

In recent years, the information environment for patients to learn about physician quality is being rapidly changed by Web-based ratings from both commercial and government efforts. However, little is known about how various types of Web-based ratings affect individuals’ choice of physicians.

Objective

The objective of this research was to measure the relative importance of Web-based quality ratings from governmental and commercial agencies on individuals’ choice of primary care physicians.

Methods

In a choice-based conjoint experiment conducted on a sample of 1000 Amazon Mechanical Turk users in October 2016, individuals were asked to choose their preferred primary care physician from pairs of physicians with different ratings in clinical and nonclinical aspects of care provided by governmental and commercial agencies.

Results

The relative log odds of choosing a physician increases by 1.31 (95% CI 1.26-1.37; P<.001) and 1.32 (95% CI 1.27-1.39; P<.001) units when the government clinical ratings and commercial nonclinical ratings move from 2 to 4 stars, respectively. The relative log odds of choosing a physician increases by 1.12 (95% CI 1.07-1.18; P<.001) units when the commercial clinical ratings move from 2 to 4 stars. The relative log odds of selecting a physician with 4 stars in nonclinical ratings provided by the government is 1.03 (95% CI 0.98-1.09; P<.001) units higher than a physician with 2 stars in this rating. The log odds of selecting a physician with 4 stars in nonclinical government ratings relative to a physician with 2 stars is 0.23 (95% CI 0.13-0.33; P<.001) units higher for females compared with males. Similar star increase in nonclinical commercial ratings increases the relative log odds of selecting the physician by female respondents by 0.15 (95% CI 0.04-0.26; P=.006) units.

Conclusions

Individuals perceive nonclinical ratings provided by commercial websites as important as clinical ratings provided by government websites when choosing a primary care physician. There are significant gender differences in how the ratings are used. More research is needed on whether patients are making the best use of different types of ratings, as well as the optimal allocation of resources in improving physician ratings from the government’s perspective.

Scope, Breadth, and Differences in Online Physician Ratings Related to Geography, Specialty, and Year: Observational Retrospective Study

Background

Physician ratings websites have emerged as a novel forum for consumers to comment on their health care experiences. Little is known about such ratings in Canada.

Objective

We investigated the scope and trends for specialty, geographic region, and time for online physician ratings in Canada using a national data source from the country’s leading physician-rating website.

Methods

This observational retrospective study used online ratings data from Canadian physicians (January 2005-September 2013; N=640,603). For specialty, province, and year of rating, we assessed whether physicians were likely to be rated favorably by using the proportion of ratings greater than the overall median rating.

Results

In total, 57,412 unique physicians had 640,603 individual ratings. Overall, ratings were positive (mean 3.9, SD 1.3). On average, each physician had 11.2 (SD 10.1) ratings. By comparing specialties with Canadian Institute of Health Information physician population numbers over our study period, we inferred that certain specialties (obstetrics and gynecology, family practice, surgery, and dermatology) were more commonly rated, whereas others (pathology, radiology, genetics, and anesthesia) were less represented. Ratings varied by specialty; cardiac surgery, nephrology, genetics, and radiology were more likely to be rated in the top 50th percentile, whereas addiction medicine, dermatology, neurology, and psychiatry were more often rated in the lower 50th percentile of ratings. Regarding geographic practice location, ratings were more likely to be favorable for physicians practicing in eastern provinces compared with western and central Canada. Regarding year, the absolute number of ratings peaked in 2007 before stabilizing and decreasing by 2013. Moreover, ratings were most likely to be positive in 2007 and again in 2013.

Conclusions

Physician-rating websites are a relatively novel source of provider-level patient satisfaction and are a valuable source of the patient experience. It is important to understand the breadth and scope of such ratings, particularly regarding specialty, geographic practice location, and changes over time.

Implementation of Digital Awareness Strategies to Engage Patients and Providers in a Lung Cancer Screening Program: Retrospective Study

Background

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Despite mandated insurance coverage for eligible patients, lung cancer screening rates remain low. Digital platforms, including social media, provide a potentially valuable tool to enhance health promotion and patient engagement related to lung cancer screening (LCS).

Objective

The aim was to assess the effectiveness of LCS digital awareness campaigns on utilization of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) and visits to institutional online educational content.

Methods

A pay-per-click campaign utilizing Google and Facebook targeted adults aged 55 years and older and caregivers aged 18 years and older (eg, spouses, adult children) with LCS content during a 20-week intervention period from May to September 2016. A concurrent pay-per-click campaign using LinkedIn and Twitter targeted health care providers with LCS content. Geographic target radius was within 60 miles of an academic medical center. Social media data included aggregate demographics and click-through rates (CTRs). Primary outcome measures were visits to institutional Web pages and scheduled LDCT exams. Study period was 20 weeks before, during, and after the digital awareness campaigns.

Results

Weekly visits to the institutional LCS Web pages were significantly higher during the digital awareness campaigns compared to the 20-week period prior to implementation (mean 823.9, SD 905.8 vs mean 51, SD 22.3, P=.001). The patient digital awareness campaign surpassed industry standard CTRs on Google (5.85%, 1108/18,955 vs 1.8%) and Facebook (2.59%, 47,750/1,846,070 vs 0.8%). The provider digital awareness campaign surpassed industry standard CTR on LinkedIn (1.1%, 630/57,079 vs 0.3%) but not Twitter (0.19%, 1139/587,133 vs 0.25%). Mean scheduled LDCT exam volumes per week before, during, and after the digital awareness campaigns were 17.4 (SD 7.5), 20.4 (SD 5.4), and 26.2 (SD 6.4), respectively, with the difference between the mean number of scheduled exams after the digital awareness campaigns and the number of exams scheduled before and after the digital awareness campaigns being statistically significant (P<.001).

Conclusions

Implementation of the LCS digital awareness campaigns was associated with increased visits to institutional educational Web pages and scheduled LDCT exams. Digital platforms are an important tool to enhance health promotion activities and engagement with patients and providers.

A cross-sectional study assessing the association between online ratings and clinical quality of care measures for US hospitals: results from an observational study

Background

Little is known about the usefulness of online ratings when searching for a hospital. We therefore assess the association between quantitative and qualitative online ratings for US hospitals and clinical quality of care measures.

Methods

First, we collected a stratified random sample of 1000 quantitative and qualitative online ratings for hospitals from the website RateMDs. We used an integrated iterative approach to develop a categorization scheme to capture both the topics and sentiment in the narrative comments. Next, we matched the online ratings with hospital-level quality measures published by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Regarding nominally scaled measures, we checked for differences in the distribution among the online rating categories. For metrically scaled measures, we applied the Spearman rank coefficient of correlation.

Results

Thirteen of the twenty-nine quality of care measures were significantly associated with the quantitative online ratings (Spearman p = ±0.143, p < 0.05 for all). Thereof, eight associations indicated better clinical outcomes for better online ratings. Seven of the twenty-nine clinical measures were significantly associated with the sentiment of patient narratives (p = ±0.114, p < 0.05 for all), whereof four associations indicated worse clinical outcomes in more favorable narrative comments.

Conclusions

There seems to be some association between quantitative online ratings and clinical performance measures. However, the relatively weak strength and inconsistency of the direction of the association as well as the lack of association with several other clinical measures may not enable the drawing of strong conclusions. Narrative comments also seem to have limited potential to reflect the clinical quality of care in its current form. Thus, online ratings are of limited usefulness in guiding patients towards high-performing hospitals from a clinical point of view. Nevertheless, patients might prefer different aspects of care when choosing a hospital.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-2886-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Health-Seeking Influence Reflected by Online Health-Related Messages Received on Social Media: Cross-Sectional Survey

Background

Major social networking platforms, such as Facebook, WhatsApp, and Twitter, have become popular means through which people share health-related information, irrespective of whether messages disseminated through these channels are authentic.

Objective

This study aims to describe the demographic characteristics of patients that may demonstrate their attitudes toward medical information shared on social media networks. Second, we address how information found through social media affects the way people deal with their health. Third, we examine whether patients initiate or alter/discontinue their medications based on information derived from social media.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional survey between April and June 2015 on patients attending outpatient clinics at King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Patients who used social media (Facebook, WhatsApp, and Twitter) were included. We designed a questionnaire with closed-ended and multiple-choice questions to assess the type of social media platforms patients used and whether information received on these platforms influenced their health care decisions. We used chi-square test to establish the relationship between categorical variables.

Results

Of the 442 patients who filled in the questionnaires, 401 used Facebook, WhatsApp, or Twitter. The majority of respondents (89.8%, 397/442) used WhatsApp, followed by Facebook (58.6%, 259/442) and Twitter (42.3%, 187/442). In most cases, respondents received health-related messages from WhatsApp and approximately 42.6% (171/401) reported ever stopping treatment as advised on a social media platform. A significantly higher proportion of patients without heart disease (P=.001) and obese persons (P=.01) checked the authenticity of information received on social media. Social media messages influenced decision making among patients without heart disease (P=.04). Respondents without heart disease (P=.001) and obese persons (P=.01) were more likely to discuss health-related information received on social media channels with a health care professional. A significant proportion of WhatsApp users reported that health-related information received on this platform influenced decisions regarding their family’s health care (P=.001). Respondents’ decisions regarding family health care were more likely to be influenced when they used two or all three types of platforms (P=.003).

Conclusions

Health education in the digital era needs to be accurate, evidence-based, and regulated. As technologies continue to evolve, we must be equipped to face the challenges it brings with it.

Public Awareness and Use of German Physician Ratings Websites: Cross-Sectional Survey of Four North German Cities

Background

Physician rating websites (PRWs) allow patients to rate, comment, and discuss physicians’ quality. The ability of PRWs to influence patient decision making and health care quality is dependent, in part, on sufficient awareness and usage of PRWs. However, previous studies have found relatively low levels of awareness and usage of PRWs, which has raised concerns about the representativeness and validity of information on PRWs.

Objective

The objectives of this study were to examine (1) participants’ awareness, use, and contribution of ratings on PRWs and how this compares with other rating websites; (2) factors that predict awareness, use, and contribution of ratings on PRWs; and (3) participants’ attitudes toward PRWs in relation to selecting a physician.

Methods

A mailed cross-sectional survey was sent to a random sample (N=1542) from four North German cities (Nordhorn, Hildesheim, Bremen, and Hamburg) between April and July 2016. Survey questions explored respondents’ awareness, use, and contribution of ratings on rating websites for service (physicians, hospitals, and hotels and restaurants) and products (media and technical) in general and the role of PRWs when searching for a new physician.

Results

A total of 280 completed surveys were returned (280/1542, 18.16% response rate), with the following findings: (1) Overall, 72.5% (200/276) of respondents were aware of PRWs. Of the respondents who were aware of PRWs, 43.6% (86/197) had used PRWs. Of the respondents who had used PRWs, 23% (19/83) had rated physicians at least once. Awareness, use, and contribution of ratings on PRWs were significantly lower in comparison with all other rating websites, except for hospital rating websites. (2) Except for the impact of responders’ gender and marital status on the awareness of PRWs and responders’ age on the use of PRWs, no other predictors had a relevant impact. (3) Whereas 31.8% (85/267) of the respondents reported that PRWs were a very important or somewhat important information source when searching for a new physician, respondents significantly more often reported that family, friends and colleagues (259/277, 93.5%), other physicians (219/274, 79.9%), and practice websites (108/266, 40.6%) were important information sources.

Conclusions

Whereas awareness of German PRWs appears to have substantially increased, the use of PRWs and contribution of ratings remains relatively low. Further research is needed to examine the reasons why only a few patients are rating physicians. However, given the information inequality between provider and consumer will always be higher for consumers using the services of physicians, it is possible that people will always rely more on interpersonal recommendations than impersonal public information before selecting a physician.

Patient Perceptions and Current Trends in Internet Use by Orthopedic Outpatients

BACKGROUND

Many studies have highlighted concerns about the completeness and quality of information found online and how this may affect patients' education about their medical problems. One aspect of internet usage that has received less attention in the literature, however, is patient perception of the information that is gathered online, and how patients use it related to their musculoskeletal care.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

The objective of the study is to utilize a cross-sectional study design to describe internet usage and patient perceptions of orthopedic online information and to identify differences in usage patterns.

METHODS

One thousand two hundred ninety-six questionnaires were distributed to consecutive patients at orthopedic outpatient clinics which consisted of questions pertaining to patients' internet use. Basic demographic data were collected, and subgroup analyses were performed to examine the effect of three variables (age, gender, and clinic type) on various outcomes.

RESULTS

84.9% of patients reported access to the internet. Of patients with internet access, 64.7% reported using the internet for obtaining orthopedic information. 43.1% of the respondents who searched for orthopedic information rated it as "very useful," 56.3% found it "somewhat useful," and 0.6% found it "not at all useful". Younger patients were more likely to have used the internet for health and orthopedic information and to have found this information either very or somewhat useful. Males were more likely to have found the internet information very useful. Overall, only 33.7% of patients who researched their current orthopedic complaint accessed the institutional website for information.

CONCLUSION

A large proportion of patients use the internet to research orthopedic information and most patients, especially younger males, find the information useful.