Physician Rating Websites: Do Radiologists Have an Online Presence?

Gilbert, Kirven; Hawkins, C. Matthew; Hughes, Danny R.; Patel, Krishan; Gogia, Navdeep; Sekhar, Aarti; Duszak, Richard

doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2015.03.039

Cited by 42 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Waiting time has already been recognized to be tied with a physician's earnings (Gupta & Denton, ); waiting time will assume greater importance as patients increasingly turn to online ratings and textual reviews for choosing physicians, similar to how customers rely on online ratings for choosing products and services (Hanauer et al, ). The medical literature has also laid out compelling reasons for physicians to establish and manage their online presence in the era of social media (Gilbert et al, ). Hence, physicians and managers of health‐care systems need to consider this added challenge when managing inefficient medical practices.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Operational efficiency and patient‐centered health care: A view from online physician reviews

Mai

Shan

et al. 2019

J of Ops Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Online reviews are playing an increasingly important role in how patients select and evaluate health‐care providers. Physician rating websites not only act as open platforms for patients to share their experiences, but can also offer valuable feedback for physicians to improve the quality of care. In this study, we analyze over one million physician reviews across 17 medical specialties and investigate the relationship between operational efficiency and patient satisfaction. We combine econometrics models with text analytics techniques to quantify the effect using both patients' ratings of physicians and their qualitative review narratives. The results provide strong empirical evidence that operational inefficiency negatively influences patient satisfaction. Specifically, a waiting time longer than 17 min will, on average, reduce the odds of getting a high rating status by 14%. Though many health care ratings examined in this study do not mitigate the negative effects brought on by long waiting time, patient narratives reflecting the importance of technical and interpersonal qualities to patients suggest a more complex set of relationships between waiting time and patient satisfaction. Our study showcases the usefulness of online physician reviews and reveals unique insights for improving the delivery of patient‐centered health care.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Operational efficiency and patient‐centered health care: A view from online physician reviews

Mai

Shan

et al. 2019

J of Ops Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies have looked at the online presence of ROs and determined only 21% of ROs have an online rating on third-party physician rating websites, which is low relative to other specialties [ 23 - 24 ]. This study builds upon previous work by using a much larger sample size of ROs, and our findings indicated that 2679/4444 (60%) of all ROs in the CMS database were found to have a review on Healthgrades.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Do Patients Think About Their Radiation Oncologists? An Assessment of Online Patient Reviews on Healthgrades

Prabhu

Randhawa

Clump

et al. 2018

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionAn increasing number of patients search for their physicians online. Many hospital systems utilize Press-Ganey studies as internal tools to analyze patient satisfaction, but independent third-party websites have a large presence online. Patients’ trust in these third-party sites may occur despite a low number of reviews and a lack of validity of patients’ entries. Healthgrades.com has been shown as the most popular site to appear on Google searches for radiation oncologists (ROs) in the United States (US). The aim of this study was to analyze patient satisfaction scores and the factors that influence those scores for American ROs on Healthgrades.MethodsThe physician ratings website Healthgrades was manually queried to obtain reviews from all Medicare-participating ROs with reviews (n=2,679). Patient Review Satisfaction Scores (PRSS) were recorded in response to a variety of questions. All information in the survey was scored from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent) for the following characteristics: likelihood to recommend (LTR), office environment, ease of scheduling, trust in the physician’s decision, staff friendliness, ability of the physician to listen and answer questions, ability of the physician to explain the condition, and whether the physician spent sufficient time with the patients. Associations amongst these factors were considered by computing Spearman correlation coefficients and utilizing Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests.ResultsThe ROs’ mean LTR score was 4.51±0.9 (median 5.0, 66% received the highest possible score of 5; 95% received a score>2). Patient reviews per RO ranged from 1 to 242 (4.50±0.9, median 2.0). LTR scores correlated very strongly with physician-related factors, ranging from r=0.85 (with appropriate time spent with patients) to r=0.89 (with level of trust in physician). LTR scores were not statistically significantly associated with gender, wait time, ROs’ years since graduation, academic status, or geographic region.ConclusionSatisfaction scores for ROs on a leading physician ratings website are very strong, and most patients leaving reviews are likely to recommend their own ROs to their friends and family. Understanding online ratings and identifying factors associated with positive ratings are important for both patients and ROs due to the recent growth in physician-rating third-party sites. ROs should have increased awareness regarding sites like Healthgrades and their online reputation.

show abstract

“…Studies have been shown that up to 80% of patients query the Internet for healthcare-related information (1), and 42% of patients in 2014 (compared with 35% in 2013) viewed online physician rating websites before their initial visit (2)(3)(4), subsequently impacting the patients' decision to visit a physician (5)(6)(7). Previous studies have investigated online ratings in plastic surgery (8)(9)(10), orthopedic surgery (11), and radiology (12). Studies have found that 88 to 90% of reviews/ratings are positive, while only 6% were negative (13,14).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Patients’ Online Perception and Ratings of Neurotologists

Goshtasbi¹,

Lehrich

Moshtaghi

et al. 2019

Otology &Amp; Neurotology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To assess and characterize patients' online ratings and comments of neurotologists and determine factors that correlate with higher ratings. Methods: All the American Neurotology Society members were queried on Healthgrades, Vitals, RateMDs, Yelp, and Google from March to June 2018. All ratings were normalized for comparison on a five-point Likert scale. All comments were categorized based on context and for positive/negative aspect. Results: Of the 560 American Neurotology Society members, 465 (83%) were rated on at least one online platform. Of those rated, 420 (90%) were on Healthgrades, 392 (84%) on Vitals, 283 (61%) on RateMDs, 232 (50%) on Google, and 56 (12%) on Yelp. Across all platforms, the average overall rating was 4.06 AE 0.68 (range: 1.00-5.00). There were significant positive correlations between overall rating and specific ratings (p < 0.01) on individual topics. Moreover, categorizing 5,317 narrative comments elicited the majority to be related to perceived physician bedside manner and clinical outcome. Although the number of positive comments outnumbered the negative ones, only the negative comments correlated (negatively) with the overall score (p < 0.01). Attending a top 25-or 50-medical schools or residency programs did not correlate with their rating. Conclusions: Online ratings and comments for neurotologists are highly dependent on patient perceptions of physician competence, caring bedside manner, and office management. Minimizing the number of negative comments, especially regarding perceived physicians' professionalism and communication, clinical outcome, bedside manners, and office management, leads to higher calculated overall scores and online perception.

show abstract

Physician Rating Websites: Do Radiologists Have an Online Presence?

Cited by 42 publications

References 21 publications

Operational efficiency and patient‐centered health care: A view from online physician reviews

Operational efficiency and patient‐centered health care: A view from online physician reviews

What Do Patients Think About Their Radiation Oncologists? An Assessment of Online Patient Reviews on Healthgrades

Patients’ Online Perception and Ratings of Neurotologists

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About