ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2016
Association Between Physician Online Rating and Quality of Care.
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 43 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
43 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- What Do Patients Say About Doctors Online? A Systematic Review of Studies on Patient Online Reviews.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Pooled it
- "They Gave Me One Star?" An Analysis of Online Reviews of Hand Surgeons.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2025Article
- Examining One-Star Reviews in Orthopaedic Hand Surgeons in Large U.S. Cities.Journal of wrist surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Assessing extremely negative online patient reviews and complaints of musculoskeletal oncology surgeons in the United States: a retrospective analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
- Effect of Negative Online Reviews and Physician Responses on Health Consumers' Choice: Experimental Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- The quality of telemedicine consultations for sexually transmitted infections in China.Health policy and planning · 2024Article
- Assessing reviews of academic oral and maxillofacial surgeons within the US on Healthgrades.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2024Article
- Are online reviews of assisted living communities associated with patient-centered outcomes?Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2023Article
- The Impact of Social Influence on the Intention to Use Physician Rating Websites: Moderated Mediation Analysis Using a Mixed Methods Approach.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Physician Gender, Patient Risk, and Web-Based Reviews: Longitudinal Study of the Relationship Between Physicians' Gender and Their Web-Based Reviews.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Choosing a Provider: What Factors Matter Most to Consumers and Patients?Journal of patient experience · 2022Article
- Comparing the Impact of Online Ratings and Report Cards on Patient Choice of Cardiac Surgeon: Large Observational Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Observational
- The impact of social media presence, age, and patient reported wait times on physician review websites for sports medicine surgeons.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2021Article
- Patient Experience Surveys Reveal Gender-Biased Descriptions of Their Care Providers.Journal of medical systems · 2021Article
- Psychiatry in the Digital Age: A Blessing or a Curse?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Review
- Academic Rhinologists' Online Rating and Perception, Scholarly Productivity, and Industry Payments.American journal of rhinology & allergy · 2021Article
- Building a Multidisciplinary Academic Surgical Gender-affirmation Program: Lessons Learned.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2021Article
- Analysis of Online Urologist Ratings: Are Rating Differences Associated With Subspecialty?Journal of patient experience · 2020Article
- Correlation of Online Physician Rating Subscores and Association With Overall Satisfaction: Observational Study of 212,933 Providers.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients are increasingly using physician review websites to find "a good doctor." However, to our knowledge, no prior study has examined the relationship between online rating and an accepted measure of quality.
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to assess the association between online physician rating and an accepted measure of quality: 30-day risk-adjusted mortality rate following coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery.
methodsIn the US states of California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania-which together account for over one-quarter of the US population-risk-adjusted mortality rates are publicly reported for all cardiac surgeons. From these reports, we recorded the 30-day mortality rate following isolated CABG surgery for each surgeon practicing in these 5 states. For each surgeon listed in the state reports, we then conducted Internet-based searches to determine his or her online rating(s). We then assessed the relationship between physician online rating and risk-adjusted mortality rate.
resultsOf the 614 surgeons listed in the state reports, we found 96.1% (590/614) to be rated online. The average online rating was 4.4 out of 5, and 78.7% (483/614) of the online ratings were 4 or higher. The median number of reviews used to formulate each rating was 4 (range 1-89), and 32.70% (503/1538) of the ratings were based on 2 or fewer reviews. Overall, there was no correlation between surgeon online rating and risk-adjusted mortality rate (P=.13). Risk-adjusted mortality rates were similar for surgeons across categories of average online rating (P>.05), and surgeon average online rating was similar across quartiles of surgeon risk-adjusted mortality rate (P>.05).
conclusionsIn this study of cardiac surgeons practicing in the 5 US states that publicly report outcomes, we found no correlation between online rating and risk-adjusted mortality rates. Patients using online rating websites to guide their choice of physician should recognize that these ratings may not reflect actual quality of care as defined by accepted metrics.
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.