ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2016
Investigating the Potential Contribution of Patient Rating Sites to Hospital Supervision: Exploratory Results From an Interview Study in the Netherlands.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- What methods are used to promote patient and family involvement in healthcare regulation? A multiple case study across four countries.BMC health services research · 2020Pooled it
- Patient feedback to improve quality of patient-centred care in public hospitals: a systematic review of the evidence.BMC health services research · 2020Pooled it
- Medical vs. Organizational Complaints: A Machine Learning Analysis Reveals Divergent Patterns in Patient Reviews Across Russian Cities.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Involving Service Users in Care Regulation: A Scoping Review of Empirical Literature.International journal of health policy and management · 2025Article
- The value of experts by experience in social domain supervision in the Netherlands: results from a 'mystery guests' project.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- SARS-CoV-2-Related Adaptation Mechanisms of Rehabilitation Clinics Affecting Patient-Centered Care: Qualitative Study of Online Patient Reports.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2023Article
- Correlations between care users' and the healthcare inspectorate's ratings of the quality of care in long-term care homes.BMJ open quality · 2023Article
- The Experiences of Stakeholders Using Social Media as a Tool for Health Service Design and Quality Improvement: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Wisdom of the Experts Versus Opinions of the Crowd in Hospital Quality Ratings: Analysis of Hospital Compare Star Ratings and Google Star Ratings.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Comparison of Patient Satisfaction in Inpatient Care Provided by Hospitalists and Nonhospitalists in South Korea.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Using Text Mining Techniques to Identify Health Care Providers With Patient Safety Problems: Exploratory Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Harvesting the wisdom of the crowd: using online ratings to explore care experiences in regions.BMC health services research · 2018Article
- Internet-Based and Mobile-Based General Practice: Cross-Sectional Survey.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOver the last decades, the patient perspective on health care quality has been unconditionally integrated into quality management. For several years now, patient rating sites have been rapidly gaining attention. These offer a new approach toward hearing the patient's perspective on the quality of health care.
objectiveThe aim of our study was to explore whether and how patient reviews of hospitals, as reported on rating sites, have the potential to contribute to health care inspector's daily supervision of hospital care.
methodsGiven the unexplored nature of the topic, an interview study among hospital inspectors was designed in the Netherlands. We performed 2 rounds of interviews with 10 senior inspectors, addressing their use and their judgment on the relevance of review data from a rating site.
resultsAll 10 Dutch senior hospital inspectors participated in this research. The inspectors initially showed some reluctance to use the major patient rating site in their daily supervision. This was mainly because of objections such as worries about how representative they are, subjectivity, and doubts about the relevance of patient reviews for supervision. However, confrontation with, and assessment of, negative reviews by the inspectors resulted in 23% of the reviews being deemed relevant for risk identification. Most inspectors were cautiously positive about the contribution of the reviews to their risk identification.
conclusionsPatient rating sites may be of value to the risk-based supervision of hospital care carried out by the Health Care Inspectorate. Health care inspectors do have several objections against the use of patient rating sites for daily supervision. However, when they are presented with texts of negative reviews from a hospital under their supervision, it appears that most inspectors consider it as an additional source of information to detect poor quality of care. Still, it should always be accompanied and verified by other quality and safety indicators. More research on the value and usability of patient rating sites in daily hospital supervision and other health settings is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.