ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2017
Web-Based Physician Ratings for California Physicians on Probation.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Data Quality Issues With Physician-Rating Websites: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Pooled it
- What Do Patients Say About Doctors Online? A Systematic Review of Studies on Patient Online Reviews.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Pooled it
- Coverage, Traits, and Geographic Distribution of Online Surgeon Reviews: Large-Scale Cross-Sectional Analysis.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- The Association Between Online Surgeon Ratings and Patients' Postoperative Outcomes in the United States.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2025Article
- Revealing Patient Dissatisfaction With Health Care Resource Allocation in Multiple Dimensions Using Large Language Models and the International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision: Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Article
- Characterizing negative reviews of orthopedic spine surgeons and practices.North American Spine Society journal · 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
- Article
- The Majority of Complaints About Orthopedic Sports Surgeons on Yelp Are Nonclinical.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2021Article
- One Decade of Online Patient Feedback: Longitudinal Analysis of Data From a German Physician Rating Website.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Comparing Precision Machine Learning With Consumer, Quality, and Volume Metrics for Ranking Orthopedic Surgery Hospitals: Retrospective Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Rejected Online Feedback From a Swiss Physician Rating Website Between 2008 and 2017: Analysis of 2352 Ratings.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Autonomic medical practice viewed through the lens of physician-rating websites.Clinical autonomic research : official journal of the Clinical Autonomic Research Society · 2020Article
- Association Between Web-Based Physician Ratings and Physician Disciplinary Convictions: Retrospective Observational Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Observational
- Quantitative Ratings and Narrative Comments on Swiss Physician Rating Websites: Frequency Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Article
- Online physician reviews: is there a place for them?Risk management and healthcare policy · 2019Article
- Association of Patient Volume With Online Ratings of California Urologists.JAMA surgery · 2018Article
- The Validity of Online Patient Ratings of Physicians: Analysis of Physician Peer Reviews and Patient Ratings.Interactive journal of medical research · 2018Article
- Scope, Breadth, and Differences in Online Physician Ratings Related to Geography, Specialty, and Year: Observational Retrospective Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWeb-based physician ratings systems are a popular tool to help patients evaluate physicians. Websites help patients find information regarding physician licensure, office hours, and disciplinary records along with ratings and reviews. Whether higher patient ratings are associated with higher quality of care is unclear.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to characterize the impact of physician probation on consumer ratings by comparing website ratings between doctors on probation against matched controls.
methodsA retrospective review of data from the Medical Board of California for physicians placed on probation from December 1989 to September 2015 was performed. Violations were categorized into nine types. Nonprobation controls were matched by zip code and specialty with probation cases in a 2:1 ratio using the California Department of Consumer Affairs website. Web-based reviews were recorded from vitals.com, healthgrades.com, and ratemds.com (ratings range from 1-5).
resultsA total of 410 physicians were placed on probation for 866 violations. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) number of ratings per doctor was 5.2 (7.8) for cases and 4 (6.3) for controls (P=.003). The mean rating for physicians on probation was 3.7 (1.6) compared with 4.0 (1.0) for controls when all three rating websites were pooled (P<.001). Violations for medical documentation, incompetence, prescription negligence, and fraud were found to have statistically significant lower rating scores. Conversely, scores for professionalism, drugs or alcohol, crime, sexual misconduct, and personal illness were similar between cases and controls. In a univariate analysis, probation was found to be associated with lower rating, odds ratio=1.5 (95% CI 1.0-2.2). This association was not significant in a multivariate model when we included age and gender.
conclusionsWeb-based physician ratings were lower for doctors on probation indicating that patients may perceive a difference. Despite these statistical findings, the absolute difference was quite small. Physician rating websites have utility but are imperfect proxies for competence. Further research on physician Web-based ratings is warranted to understand what they measure and how they are associated with quality.
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.