Differences in Online Consumer Ratings of Health Care Providers Across Medical, Surgical, and Allied Health Specialties: Observational Study of 212,933 Providers

Daskivich, Timothy J.; Luu, Michael; Noah, Benjamin; Fuller, Garth; Anger, Jennifer T.; Spiegel, Brennan

doi:10.2196/jmir.9160

Cited by 31 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, it is necessary to verify the validity of the score by applying it to patients independent from the derivation group [ 9 ]. Discrimination was measured by AUC [ 10 ]. It is generally defined as useful if AUC is >0.7 and is defined as excellent if AUC is between 0.8–0.9 considering the diagnostic accuracy [ 11 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and validation of risk score for predicting spontaneous rupture of hepatocellular carcinoma

Gong

et al. 2020

Ann Surg Treat Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Spontaneous rupture is a potentially serious complication of liver cancer. A risk score was developed and validated for predicting spontaneous rupture based on a retrospective study. Methods Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to study the relationship between clinical variables and spontaneous rupture. The independent rupture predictors were converted into a score based on the odds ratio. Predicted attributes of the developed scores were then verified using a dataset in 2019. Results The incidence of spontaneous rupture was 5.5% from 2002 to 2019. A 10-point score (α-FP of ≥400 µg/L, 1; protrusion from liver surface, 2; ascites, 3; tumor size of >5 cm, 4) was derived for prediction of rupture and area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve was 0.9 (95% confidence interval, 0.87–0.92). When applying a cutoff value of 5 points or more, the specificity was 0.87 and the sensitivity was 0.84. A validation cohort consisting of 202 hepatocellular carcinoma patients reproduces the predictive, identification, and calibration characteristics. The observed rate of spontaneous rupture according to risk stratification of the score was 0.6% for those with a score of 0–4, 21.6% for a score of 5–7, and 36.4% for a score of 8–10 in the validation cohort. Conclusion Here, based on routine clinical data, we determine the factors that affect prognosis and propose an effective tool for predicting spontaneous rupture, which may be useful in guiding priority treatment of high-risk patients or clinical routine preventive treatment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and validation of risk score for predicting spontaneous rupture of hepatocellular carcinoma

Gong

et al. 2020

Ann Surg Treat Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, McGrath and colleagues recently reported that patients tend to give more favorable reviews to doctors listed on Castle Connolly Medical's "America's Top Doctors, " a peer-reviewed title that carries a sense of prestige or, at the very least, esteem (20). Moreover, surgical subspecialties often associated with higher incomes tend to receive higher ratings than their generalist counterparts (21,22). In our cohort we did not replicate these findings, as there was a small negative correlation between income and ratings in the surgical cohort.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physicians' Earnings Do Not Affect Their Online Ratings

Haffey

Hopman

Leveridge

2020

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Physician-rating websites have exploded in popularity in recent years. Consequently, these sites have garnered attention from researchers interested in factors influencing patient satisfaction. A doctor's earnings might reflect practice patterns that could influence their patients' perceptions. We sought to explore any association between physicians' earnings and their online ratings. Methods: The names and billings of 500 physicians from British Columbia, Canada were randomly extracted from the 2016-17 BC Blue Book and matched to their profiles on RateMDs.com. Physicians' earnings were compared to their global ratings and to their Staff, Punctuality, Helpfulness, and Knowledge scores. Earnings and ratings were also compared between men and women, as well as between family medicine, surgical, and internal medicine and subspecialties cohorts. Results: We found no significant correlation between physicians' earnings and their global online ratings (p = 0.304). Weak negative correlations existed between earnings and Staff and Helpfulness ratings (Spearman's rho = −0.055, p < 0.001; rho = −0.033, p < 0.028). Online ratings were largely favorable (mean MD rating of 3.85/5. Male physicians earned significantly more than their female colleagues ($371,734.85 and $261,590.82, respectively; p < 0.001), but no significant difference existed between men and women with regards to online ratings (mean 3.87 and 3.81, respectively, p = 0.191). Surgical and Family Medicine specialties showed a negative correlation between income and ratings; no relationship was seen in the internal medicine and subspecialties cohort. Conclusions: No meaningful association was found between physicians' earnings and their online ratings, although there is an impact of specialty grouping. Patients tend to review doctors favorably online; these data add to the discussion of whether male and female doctors are differentially rated. Trends toward increased transparency in health care systems may help to elucidate how doctors' earnings influence patients' perception of and satisfaction with the care they receive.

show abstract

“…The trust level task is designed through the average rating value (ARV), which is used to calculate the average trust value given by the patient to their physician. The ARVs were generated based on the idea of Marsh [ 41 ] and Daskivich [ 56 ] to identify the trustworthiness level of a physician or patient with independent values. The trustworthiness level and independent value of a physician denoted by ARV are shown in Table 2 .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The patient allows viewing the trust value and trust level of physicians. A physician’s trust value is based on the average of the trustworthiness indicators [ 28 ] and the ARV as the rating trust level [ 41 , 56 ]. The trust level of a physician is then identified by the trust value.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Breast Self-Examination System Using Multifaceted Trustworthiness: Observational Study

Khana¹,

Singh²,

Damanhoori³

et al. 2020

JMIR Med Inform

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Breast cancer is the leading cause of mortality among women worldwide. However, female patients often feel reluctant and embarrassed about meeting physicians in person to discuss their intimate body parts, and prefer to use social media for such interactions. Indeed, the number of patients and physicians interacting and seeking information related to breast cancer on social media has been growing. However, a physician may behave inappropriately on social media by sharing a patient’s personal medical data excessively with colleagues or the public. Such an act would reduce the physician’s trustworthiness from the patient’s perspective. The multifaceted trust model is currently most commonly used for investigating social media interactions, which facilitates its enhanced adoption in the context of breast self-examination. The characteristics of the multifaceted trust model go beyond being personalized, context-dependent, and transitive. This model is more user-centric, which allows any user to evaluate the interaction process. Thus, in this study, we explored and evaluated use of the multifaceted trust model for breast self-examination as a more suitable trust model for patient-physician social media interactions in breast cancer screening. Objective The objectives of this study were: (1) to identify the trustworthiness indicators that are suitable for a breast self-examination system, (2) design and propose a breast self-examination system, and (3) evaluate the multifaceted trustworthiness interaction between patients and physicians. Methods We used a qualitative study design based on open-ended interviews with 32 participants (16 outpatients and 16 physicians). The interview started with an introduction to the research objective and an explanation of the steps on how to use the proposed breast self-examination system. The breast self-examination system was then evaluated by asking the patient to rate their trustworthiness with the physician after the consultation. The evaluation was also based on monitoring the activity in the chat room (interactions between physicians and patients) during daily meetings, weekly meetings, and the articles posted by the physician in the forum. Results Based on the interview sessions with 16 physicians and 16 patients on using the breast self-examination system, honesty had a strong positive correlation (r=0.91) with trustworthiness, followed by credibility (r=0.85), confidence (r=0.79), and faith (r=0.79). In addition, belief (r=0.75), competency (r=0.73), and reliability (r=0.73) were strongly correlated with trustworthiness, with the lowest correlation found for reputation (r=0.72). The correlation among trustworthiness indicators was significant (P<.001). Moreover, the trust level of a patient for a particular physician was found to increase after several interactions. Conclusions Multifaceted trustworthiness has a significant impact on a breast self-examination system. Evaluation of trustworthiness indicators helps to ensure a trustworthy system and ethical interaction between a patient and physician. A new patient can obtain a consultation by referring to the best physician according to preference of other patients. Patients can also trust a physician based on another patient’s recommendation regarding the physician’s trust level. The correlation analysis further showed that the most preferred trustworthiness indicator is honesty.

show abstract

Differences in Online Consumer Ratings of Health Care Providers Across Medical, Surgical, and Allied Health Specialties: Observational Study of 212,933 Providers

Cited by 31 publications

References 12 publications

Development and validation of risk score for predicting spontaneous rupture of hepatocellular carcinoma

Development and validation of risk score for predicting spontaneous rupture of hepatocellular carcinoma

Physicians' Earnings Do Not Affect Their Online Ratings

Breast Self-Examination System Using Multifaceted Trustworthiness: Observational Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About