Literature DB >> 20359403

An analysis of healthcare providers' online ratings.

Erik W Black1, Lindsay A Thompson, Heidi Saliba, Kara Dawson, Nicole M Paradise Black.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Many websites allow consumers to evaluate their healthcare experience yet scant data exist that explore the type and content of reviews.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and describe online healthcare provider reviews.
METHODS: We analysed 16,703 ratings on 6101 providers from four US cities. Ratings spanned five categories and an overall provider score. We also performed text analyses of narrative commentary (n = 15,952).
RESULTS: Providers had a high mean score for each category (3.7-4.0 out of 5). Higher overall scores were associated with higher staff (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.0, 95% CI 2.9-3.0, P < 0.01) and punctuality scores (aOR 2.1, 95% CI 2.05-2.15, P < 0.01). Review frequency was inversely associated with scores, (aOR 0.94, 95% CI 0.92-0.96, P < 0.01). Analyses of narrative commentaries revealed more positive than negative terms (P < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Online ratings were largely positive. Future research must discern how online surveys affect patient referrals, provider reputations and patients' perceptions of quality of care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20359403     DOI: 10.14236/jhi.v17i4.744

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Inform Prim Care        ISSN: 1475-9985


  22 in total

1.  Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Florida: do 20-year trends document the salutary benefits of centralization of care?

Authors:  Carrie E Ryan; Thomas W Wood; Sharona B Ross; Amanda E Smart; Prashant B Sukharamwala; Alexander S Rosemurgy
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2015-08-07       Impact factor: 3.647

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

Authors:  Kanu Okike; Natalie R Uhr; Sherry Y M Shin; Kristal C Xie; Chong Y Kim; Tadashi T Funahashi; Michael H Kanter
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2019-09-17       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Ethical principles for physician rating sites.

Authors:  Daniel Strech
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2011-12-06       Impact factor: 5.428

4.  A changing landscape of physician quality reporting: analysis of patients' online ratings of their physicians over a 5-year period.

Authors:  Guodong Gordon Gao; Jeffrey S McCullough; Ritu Agarwal; Ashish K Jha
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2012-02-24       Impact factor: 5.428

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

Authors:  Haijing Hao
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2015-06-01       Impact factor: 5.428

Review 6.  Eight questions about physician-rating websites: a systematic review.

Authors:  Martin Emmert; Uwe Sander; Frank Pisch
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 5.428

Review 7.  Popularity of internet physician rating sites and their apparent influence on patients' choices of physicians.

Authors:  Christopher M Burkle; Mark T Keegan
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2015-09-26       Impact factor: 2.655

8.  A cross-sectional study assessing the association between online ratings and structural and quality of care measures: results from two German physician rating websites.

Authors:  Martin Emmert; Thomas Adelhardt; Uwe Sander; Veit Wambach; Jörg Lindenthal
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2015-09-24       Impact factor: 2.655

9.  An analysis of online evaluations on a physician rating website: evidence from a German public reporting instrument.

Authors:  Martin Emmert; Florian Meier
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2013-08-06       Impact factor: 5.428

10.  Physician choice making and characteristics associated with using physician-rating websites: cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Martin Emmert; Florian Meier; Frank Pisch; Uwe Sander
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2013-08-28       Impact factor: 5.428

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.