scholarly journals Exploring Types of Information Sources Used When Choosing Doctors: Observational Study in an Online Health Care Community (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuang Zhang ◽  
Jying-Nan Wang ◽  
Ya-Ling Chiu ◽  
Yuan-Teng Hsu
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Medical Decision Making ◽  
Information Sources ◽  
Information Source ◽  
Online Reviews ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Medical Specialties ◽  
Care Community ◽  
Types Of Information ◽  
Friend Recommendations

BACKGROUND Patients attempt to make appropriate decisions based on their own knowledge when choosing a doctor. In this process, the first question usually faced is that of how to obtain useful and relevant information. This study investigated the types of information sources that are used widely by patients in choosing a doctor and identified ways in which the preferred sources differ in various situations. OBJECTIVE This study aims to address the following questions: (1) What is the proportion in which each of the various information sources is used? (2) How does the information source preferred by patients in choosing a doctor change when there is a difference in the difficulty of medical decision making, in the level of the hospital, or in a rural versus urban situation? (3) How do information sources used by patients differ when they choose doctors with different specialties? METHODS This study overcomes a major limitation in the use of the survey technique by employing data from the Good Doctor website, which is now China's leading online health care community, data which are objective and can be obtained relatively easily and frequently. Multinomial logistic regression models were applied to examine whether the proportion of use of these information sources changes in different situations. We then used visual analysis to explore the question of which type of information source patients prefer to use when they seek medical assistance from doctors with different specialties. RESULTS The 3 main information sources were online reviews (OR), family and friend recommendations (FR), and doctor recommendations (DR), with proportions of use of 32.93% (559,345/1,698,666), 23.68% (402,322/1,698,666), and 17.48% (296,912/1,698,666), respectively. Difficulty in medical decision making, the hospital level, and rural-urban differences were significantly associated with patients’ preferred information sources for choosing doctors. Further, the sources of information that patients prefer to use were found to vary when they looked for doctors with different medical specialties. CONCLUSIONS Patients are less likely to use online reviews when medical decisions are more difficult or when the provider is not a tertiary hospital, the former situation leading to a greater use of online reviews and the latter to a greater use of family and friend recommendations. In addition, patients in large cities are more likely to use information from online reviews than family and friend recommendations. Among different medical specialties, for those in which personal privacy is a concern, online reviews are the most common source. For those related to children, patients are more likely to refer to family and friend recommendations, and for those related to surgery, they value doctor recommendations more highly. Our results can not only contribute to aiding government efforts to further promote the dissemination of health care information but may also help health care industry managers develop better marketing strategies.

scholarly journals Exploring Types of Information Sources Used When Choosing Doctors: Observational Study in an Online Health Care Community

10.2196/20910 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (9) ◽  
pp. e20910
Author(s):  
Shuang Zhang ◽  
Jying-Nan Wang ◽  
Ya-Ling Chiu ◽  
Yuan-Teng Hsu
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Medical Decision Making ◽  
Information Sources ◽  
Information Source ◽  
Online Reviews ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Medical Specialties ◽  
Care Community ◽  
Types Of Information ◽  
Friend Recommendations

Background Patients attempt to make appropriate decisions based on their own knowledge when choosing a doctor. In this process, the first question usually faced is that of how to obtain useful and relevant information. This study investigated the types of information sources that are used widely by patients in choosing a doctor and identified ways in which the preferred sources differ in various situations. Objective This study aims to address the following questions: (1) What is the proportion in which each of the various information sources is used? (2) How does the information source preferred by patients in choosing a doctor change when there is a difference in the difficulty of medical decision making, in the level of the hospital, or in a rural versus urban situation? (3) How do information sources used by patients differ when they choose doctors with different specialties? Methods This study overcomes a major limitation in the use of the survey technique by employing data from the Good Doctor website, which is now China's leading online health care community, data which are objective and can be obtained relatively easily and frequently. Multinomial logistic regression models were applied to examine whether the proportion of use of these information sources changes in different situations. We then used visual analysis to explore the question of which type of information source patients prefer to use when they seek medical assistance from doctors with different specialties. Results The 3 main information sources were online reviews (OR), family and friend recommendations (FR), and doctor recommendations (DR), with proportions of use of 32.93% (559,345/1,698,666), 23.68% (402,322/1,698,666), and 17.48% (296,912/1,698,666), respectively. Difficulty in medical decision making, the hospital level, and rural-urban differences were significantly associated with patients’ preferred information sources for choosing doctors. Further, the sources of information that patients prefer to use were found to vary when they looked for doctors with different medical specialties. Conclusions Patients are less likely to use online reviews when medical decisions are more difficult or when the provider is not a tertiary hospital, the former situation leading to a greater use of online reviews and the latter to a greater use of family and friend recommendations. In addition, patients in large cities are more likely to use information from online reviews than family and friend recommendations. Among different medical specialties, for those in which personal privacy is a concern, online reviews are the most common source. For those related to children, patients are more likely to refer to family and friend recommendations, and for those related to surgery, they value doctor recommendations more highly. Our results can not only contribute to aiding government efforts to further promote the dissemination of health care information but may also help health care industry managers develop better marketing strategies.

May We Support Your Decision?

1996 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 175-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin Gordon
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Medical Decision Making ◽  
Electronic Patient Record ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Technical Developments

Expert systems to support medical decision-making have so far achieved few successes. Current technical developments, however, may overcome some of the limitations. Although there are several theoretical currents in medical artificial intelligence, there are signs of them converging. Meanwhile, decision support systems, which set themselves more modest goals than replicating or improving on clinicians' expertise, have come into routine use in places where an adequate electronic patient record exists. They may also be finding a wider role, assisting in the implementation of clinical practice guidelines. There is, however, still much uncertainty about the kinds of decision support that doctors and other health care professionals are likely to want or accept.

scholarly journals How Do People Choose to Be Informed? A Survey of The Information Searched for in The Choice of Primary Care Provider in Sweden

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caroline Hoffstedt ◽  
Magnus Fredriksson ◽  
Ulrika Winblad
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Care Provider ◽  
Primary Care Provider ◽  
Information Sources ◽  
Information Source ◽  
Patient Choice ◽  
Reliable Information ◽  
Clinical Quality ◽  
Active Choice ◽  
Types Of Information

Abstract Background: To stimulate quality through choice of provider, patients need to seek and base their decisions on both relevant and reliable information describing providers’ clinical quality. The purpose of this study was first to investigate what types of information and information sources patients turned to in the active choice of primary care provider. Second, it investigated whether a sub-group of patients considered more likely to actively seek information, also sought more advanced information about the clinical quality of providers. Methods: Data collection was performed through a web-based survey to the general adult (18+) Swedish population, for a net sample of 3 150 respondents. Descriptive statistics were used to study what types of information and information sources respondents used prior to their choice. Multiple regression analysis was employed to examine predictors for seeking relevant and reliable information describing providers’ clinical quality.Results: Patients in active choice situations searched mainly for basic information, for instance, how to switch providers and their geographical location, and used a median of one information source. Information sources used were mainly dependent sources, such as providers themselves, and family and acquaintances. The sub-group of individuals more likely to seek information were not found to seek more advanced forms of information. Conclusions: Not even the patients considered most likely to seek information prior to their choice of primary care provider, searched for information deemed necessary to make well-informed choices. Thus, patients did not act according to the theoretical assumptions underlying the patient choice reforms, i.e., making informed choices based on clinical quality in order to promote the best providers over inferior ones. The results call for governments and health care authorities to actively assess and develop providers’ clinical quality by means other than patient choice.

Like, Comment, Post . . . Lawsuit?!

2020 ◽  
pp. 169-174
Author(s):  
Jillian L. McGrath ◽  
Lydia M. Sahlani
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Social Media ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Electronic Communication ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Care Community ◽  
Legal Risks ◽  
Internet Forums ◽  
Collaborative Diagnosis

Social media (SM) and electronic communication (EC) use in emergency practice settings has offered patients and health care providers expansive options in accessing and utilizing information that affects medical decision-making. This widespread use has created opportunities and challenges for the health care community. This chapter discusses some of the ethical and legal ramifications of utilizing electronic communication, social media, and internet forums in patient care. The chapter seeks to prime emergency physicians and other providers to better inform themselves in order to ensure compliance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and other privacy standards. This will facilitate better patient outcomes via collaborative diagnosis while protecting against legal risks associated with the use of SM, EC, and recording for medical purposes.

Patients' Desire to Participate in Decision-Making in Psychiatry: A Questionnaire Survey in Japan

2000 ◽  
Vol 86 (2) ◽  
pp. 389-399 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chieko Hasui ◽  
Miki Hayashi ◽  
Atsuko Tomoda ◽  
Maki Kohro ◽  
Kyoko Tanaka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Medical Decision Making ◽  
Medical Information ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Educational Background ◽  
The Self ◽  
Case Vignette ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Personality Factors ◽  
Types Of Information

Japanese national sentiment has been described as paternalistic, which has potentially wide-ranging implications for the manner in which psychiatric patients should participate in medical decision-making. To examine the extent and possible determinants of the desire to participate in medical decision-making among Japanese people, we distributed a packet of questionnaires to 747 (nonmedical) university students and 114 of their parents. The questionnaires included an imaginary case vignette of psychotic depression. The participants were asked whether they would want various types of medical information, i.e., diagnosis, aetiology, treatment, outcomes, medical charts, etc., disclosed to them were they in such a psychiatric condition. Also included was the 1995 Scale for Independent and Interdependent Construal of the Self by Kiuchi. More than half of the participants wanted all the types of medical information disclosed to them. Those participants who wanted to have all types of information disclosed to them ( n = 413) as compared to those who did not want to know at least one type of information ( n = 445), tended to be male and to have an educational background in psychiatry (9.7% vs 5.4%) as well as an assertive attitude as indicated by a higher score on Independence on the Scale for Independence and Interdependent Construal of the Self. These results suggest that the Japanese in this sample are more likely to want to make an autonomous contribution to the psychiatric decision-making process and that less desire for information can be predicted by some demographic and personality factors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document