Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28830852›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2017

Web-Based Physician Ratings for California Physicians on Probation.

Gregory P Murphy, Mohannad A Awad, E Charles Osterberg, Thomas W Gaither, Thanabhudee Chumnarnsongkhroh, Samuel L Washington, Benjamin N Breyer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. 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 · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The Majority of Complaints About Orthopedic Sports Surgeons on Yelp Are Nonclinical.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Autonomic medical practice viewed through the lens of physician-rating websites.Clinical autonomic research : official journal of the Clinical Autonomic Research Society · 2020
    Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Online physician reviews: is there a place for them?Risk management and healthcare policy · 2019
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Gregory P Murphy *Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-8161-7149
Mohannad A Awad *Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5074-5479
E Charles Osterberg *Dell Medical School, Department of Surgery, University of Texas, Austin, TX, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9752-8914
Thomas W Gaither *School of Medicine, Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0451-8344
Thanabhudee Chumnarnsongkhroh *Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-8988-3919
Samuel L Washington *Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2467-6115
Benjamin N BreyerZuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0532-048X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Patient SatisfactionPhysiciansAdultCaliforniaFemaleHumansInternetMaleQuality of Health CareRetrospective StudiesInternetonline physician ratingsprobationquality of care

Identifiers

PMID28830852
PMCPMC5585591

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.