Physician Ratings Published on Healthcare Organizations’ Websites: Are They Biased?

Abstract

In today's age of social media, individuals use physician-rating websites (PRWs) to find information about healthcare providers and make decisions on which providers to choose accordingly. In line with this trend, healthcare organizations such as clinics and hospitals offer their own physician-rating platforms and mechanisms. However, a major concern regarding this form of privately-administered rating mechanism is the potentially high level of bias that may make the ratings published on those websites inaccurate and unreliable. In this study, we examined this form of bias. We used two hospital websites and four independent PRWs including RateMDs, HealthGrades, Vitals, and Google Reviews to collect, compare, and analyze patient satisfaction scores associated with a total of 569 physicians working in two hospitals located in Utah. The results of the analysis of variance (ANOVA), paired t-tests, and box plots demonstrated that, as hypothesized, the ratings published on the hospitals' websites had significantly higher mean values and narrower distributions than those published on the independent PRWs. Our findings offer important implications for research and practice.

An Empirical Examination of Factors Influencing the Intention to Use Physician Rating Websites

“…The physician ratings posted on hospitals' websites have also been shown to be highly skewed toward positive values and this skewness has been demonstrated to be stronger than corresponding skewness on commercial PRWs [25]. The average rating of UPMC doctors posted on that organization's website, for example, is 4.8, which could be perceived to be oddly high.…”

“…In line with the growing adoption of social media and online review platforms in various sectors, patients in different countries such as United States [25,27], Germany [11,32], and China [21] use physician rating websites (PRWs) to review physicians and write comments about them. The reviews shared in this way can help other patients make more informed and judicious decisions on which doctors to visit.…”

“…Hospitals and clinics have also started offering their own physician rating services [23,25]. They send satisfaction surveys to their patients asking them about their care experience.…”

“…They send satisfaction surveys to their patients asking them about their care experience. The feedback including numeric ratings and narrative comments collected in this way are then published on the organization's website [25].…”

An online card‐sorting study to inform the initial low‐fidelity design of a crowdsourced health information system for individuals who have chronic health conditions seeking local health‐related resources

“…Despite the benefits of existing online platforms centered around providing eWOM recommendations through reviews and/or ratings, many of these platforms still have substantial limitations. Kordzadeh () found major inconsistencies in the patient satisfaction scores for physicians published on the hospitals' websites compared to the scores posted on physician‐rating websites, such as RateMDs, HealthGrades, Vitals, and Google Reviews, with hospital websites reporting significantly higher mean ratings. The value of independent physician‐rating websites has also been limited due to the skewed number of positive reviews (Gao, McCullough, Agarwal, & Jha, ; Hanauer et al, ; Kadry, Chu, Kadry, Gammas, & Macario, ; Pasternak & Scherger, ), the lack of detailed information around patients' interactions with physicians on these sites, and the cumbersome search mechanisms provided for finding physicians online (Lagu, Hannon, Rothberg, & Lindenauer, ; Pettigrew & Durrance, ).…”