Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28150098›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2017

Physician and Patient Views on Public Physician Rating Websites: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Alison M Holliday, Allen Kachalia, Gregg S Meyer, Thomas D Sequist

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. The Majority of Complaints About Orthopedic Sports Surgeons on Yelp Are Nonclinical.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Alison M HollidayHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. alison_holliday@hms.harvard.edu.
Allen KachaliaHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Gregg S MeyerHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Thomas D SequistDivision of General Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNumerical ratings and narrative comments about physicians are increasingly available online. These physician rating websites include independent websites reporting crowd-sourced data from online users and health systems reporting data from their internal patient experience surveys.

objectiveTo assess patient and physician views on physician rating websites.

designCross-sectional physician (electronic) and patient (paper) surveys conducted in August 2015.

participantsEight hundred twenty-eight physicians (response rate 43%) affiliated with one of four hospitals in a large accountable care organization in eastern Massachusetts; 494 adult patients (response rate 34%) who received care in this system in May 2015. MAIN MEASURES: Use and perceptions of physician rating websites. KEY

resultsFifty-three percent of physicians and 39% of patients reported visiting a physician rating website at least once. Physicians reported higher levels of agreement with the accuracy of numerical data (53%) and narrative comments (62%) from health system patient experience surveys compared to numerical data (36%) and narrative comments (36%) on independent websites. Patients reported higher levels of agreement with trusting the accuracy of data obtained from independent websites (57%) compared to health system patient experience surveys (45%). Twenty-one percent of physicians and 51% of patients supported posting narrative comments online for all consumers. The majority (78%) of physicians believed that posting narrative comments online would increase physician job stress; smaller proportions perceived a negative effect on the physician-patient relationship (46%), health care overuse (34%), and patient-reported experiences of care (33%). Over one-fourth of patients (29%) believed that posting narrative comments would cause them to be less open.

conclusionsPhysicians and patients have different views on whether independent or health system physician rating websites are the more reliable source of information. Their views on whether such data should be shared on public websites are also discordant.

Indexed as

InternetPatient SatisfactionAgedConsumer Health InformaticsCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInformation Seeking BehaviorMaleMassachusettsMiddle AgedPerceptionPhysician-Patient RelationsQuality Indicators, Health Careconsumer healthdoctor–patient relationshipspatient engagementpatient satisfactionquality improvement

Identifiers

PMID28150098
PMCPMC5442010

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.