scholarly journals Authors’ Reply to: Is a Ratio Scale Assumption for Physician Ratings Justified? Comment on “What Patients Value in Physicians: Analyzing Drivers of Patient Satisfaction Using Physician-Rating Website Data” (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonja Bidmon ◽  
Ossama Elshiewy ◽  
Ralf Terlutter ◽  
Yasemin Boztug
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Ratio Scale ◽  
Physician Rating ◽  
Physician Rating Website

Ethnic and gender-based prejudice towards medical doctors? The relationship between physicians’ ethnicity, gender, and ratings on a physician rating website

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Mathias Kauff ◽  
Julian Anslinger ◽  
Oliver Christ ◽  
Moritz Niemann ◽  
Michaela Geierhos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Doctors ◽  
Physician Rating ◽  
Physician Rating Website ◽  
Gender Based ◽  
And Gender ◽  
The Relationship

scholarly journals Rejected Online Feedback From a Swiss Physician Rating Website Between 2008 and 2017: Analysis of 2352 Ratings (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart McLennan
Keyword(s):  
Financial Incentives ◽  
German Language ◽  
Patient Feedback ◽  
Narrative Comment ◽  
Satisfaction With Treatment ◽  
Physician Rating ◽  
Quantitative Rating ◽  
Physician Rating Website ◽  
Online Feedback ◽  
Narrative Comments

BACKGROUND Previous research internationally has only analyzed publicly available feedback on physician rating websites (PRWs). However, it appears that many PRWs are not publishing all the feedback they receive. Analysis of this rejected feedback could provide a better understanding of the types of feedback that are currently not published and whether this is appropriate. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to examine (1) the number of patient feedback rejected from the Swiss PRW Medicosearch, (2) the evaluation tendencies of the rejected patient feedback, and (3) the types of issues raised in the rejected narrative comments. METHODS The Swiss PRW Medicosearch provided all the feedback that had been rejected between September 16, 2008, and September 22, 2017. The feedback were analyzed and classified according to a theoretical categorization framework of physician-, staff-, and practice-related issues. RESULTS Between September 16, 2008, and September 22, 2017, Medicosearch rejected a total of 2352 patient feedback. The majority of feedback rejected (1754/2352, 74.6%) had narrative comments in the German language. However, 11.9% (279/2352) of the rejected feedback only provided a quantitative rating with no narrative comment. Overall, 25% (588/2352) of the rejected feedback were positive, 18.7% (440/2352) were neutral, and 56% (1316/2352) were negative. The average rating of the rejected feedback was 2.8 (SD 1.4). In total, 44 subcategories addressing the physician (n=20), staff (n=9), and practice (n=15) were identified. In total, 3804 distinct issues were identified within the 44 subcategories of the categorization framework; 75% (2854/3804) of the issues were related to the physician, 6.4% (242/3804) were related to the staff, and 18.6% (708/3804) were related to the practice. Frequently mentioned issues identified from the rejected feedback included (1) satisfaction with treatment (533/1903, 28%); (2) the overall assessment of the physician (392/1903, 20.6%); (3) recommending the physician (345/1903, 18.1%); (4) the physician’s communication (261/1903, 13.7%); (5) the physician’s caring attitude (220/1903, 11.6%); and (6) the physician’s friendliness (203/1903, 10.6%). CONCLUSIONS It is unclear why the majority of the feedback were rejected. This is problematic and raises concerns that online patient feedback are being inappropriately manipulated. If online patient feedback is going to be collected, there needs to be clear policies and practices about how this is handled. It cannot be left to the whims of PRWs, who may have financial incentives to suppress negative feedback, to decide which feedback is or is not published online. Further research is needed to examine how many PRWs are using criteria for determining which feedback is published or not, what those criteria are, and what measures PRWs are using to address the manipulation of online patient feedback.

scholarly journals Tracking patients healthcare experiences during the COVID-19 outbreak: Topic modeling and sentiment analysis of doctor reviews

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (3A) ◽  
Author(s):  
Adnan M. Shah ◽  
◽  
Xiangbin Yan ◽  
Samia tariq ◽  
Syed Asad A. Shah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Sentiment Analysis ◽  
Topic Modeling ◽  
Swot Analysis ◽  
Vaccine Development ◽  
Time Slice ◽  
Healthcare Organizations ◽  
Physician Rating ◽  
Physician Rating Website

Emerging voices of patients in the form of opinions and expectations about the quality of care can improve healthcare service quality. A large volume of patients’ opinions as online doctor reviews (ODRs) are available online to access, analyze, and improve patients’ perceptions. This paper aims to explore COVID-19-related conversations, complaints, and sentiments using ODRs posted by users of the physician rating website. We analyzed 96,234 ODRs of 5,621 physicians from a prominent health rating website in the United Kingdom (Iwantgreatcare.org) in threetime slices (i.e., from February 01 to October 31, 2020). We employed machine learning approach, dynamic topic modeling, to identify prominent bigrams, salient topics and labels, sentiments embedded in reviews and topics, and patient-perceived root cause and strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analyses to examine SWOT for healthcare organizations. This method finds a total of 30 latent topics with 10 topics across each time slice. The current study identified new discussion topics about COVID-19 occurring from time slice 1 to time slice 3, such as news about the COVID-19 pandemic, violence against the lockdown, quarantine process and quarantine centers at different locations, and vaccine development/treatment to stop virus spread. Sentiment analysis reveals that fear for novel pathogen prevails across all topics. Based on the SWOT analysis, our findings provide a clue for doctors, hospitals, and government officials to enhance patients’ satisfaction and minimize dissatisfaction by satisfying their needs and improve the quality of care during the COVID-19 crisis.

Narrative Comments about Urologists on Physician Rating Websites Provide Insight into What Drives Patient Satisfaction Surveys

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 222-226
Author(s):  
Connor G. Policastro ◽  
Bryan Carnes ◽  
Derek Friedman ◽  
Natasha Ginzburg ◽  
Elizabeth K. Ferry
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Physician Rating ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Narrative Comments ◽  
Satisfaction Surveys

scholarly journals Association Between Web-Based Physician Ratings and Physician Disciplinary Convictions: Retrospective Observational Study (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Janine Liu ◽  
Hanna R Goldberg ◽  
Eric JM Lentz ◽  
John Justin Matelski ◽  
Asim Alam ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Observational Study ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Quality Care ◽  
Sexual Misconduct ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Sexual Offenses ◽  
Physician Rating ◽  
Physician Rating Website

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; <i>P</i>&lt;.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; <i>P</i>=.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; <i>P</i>=.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.

scholarly journals What Patients Value in Physicians: Analyzing Drivers of Patient Satisfaction Using Physician-Rating Website Data (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonja Bidmon ◽  
Ossama Elshiewy ◽  
Ralf Terlutter ◽  
Yasemin Boztug
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Care Management ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Health Care Management ◽  
Increasing Returns ◽  
Evaluation Measures ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Overall Evaluation ◽  
Physician Rating

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.

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

10.2196/16708 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. e16708
Author(s):  
Jessica Janine Liu ◽  
Hanna R Goldberg ◽  
Eric JM Lentz ◽  
John Justin Matelski ◽  
Asim Alam ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Observational Study ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Quality Care ◽  
Sexual Misconduct ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Sexual Offenses ◽  
Physician Rating ◽  
Physician Rating Website

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document