ArticleJournal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie2018
Influence of physician evaluation portals on orthodontist selection by patients.
Article in Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- How patients navigate specialist referral pathways in hand surgery: a cross-sectional survey study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Patient considerations for orthodontists: A comparative study of university students in Malaysia and Taiwan.Journal of dental sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis survey aimed to determine the influence of physician evaluation portals (PEP) on a patient's choice of physicians, particularly orthodontists. MATERIALS AND
methodsQuestionnaires were used to collect sociodemographic data, reasons for orthodontist selection, type of Internet use, as well as information on the knowledge, use and evaluation of 14 popular PEPs. A total of 506 questionnaires were evaluated, and a descriptive statistical evaluation was conducted using the χ
resultsThe majority of the respondents selected orthodontists on the basis of personal recommendations by other physicians (35%), family/friends (33%) or patient referral (14%). Currently, the most popular portals in Germany, which are mostly found through Internet searches, are jameda.de (36%) and arztauskunft.de (19%). A total of 5% of the respondents have already used a PEP to evaluate a physician. Moreover, 70% of the respondents described PEPs as helpful, 28% as recommendable and 2% use PEPs regularly. Knowledge of PEPs is correlated with the level of educational attainment (p = 0.024) and the frequency of Internet use (p < 0.001).
conclusionOn the selection of healthcare providers, particularly orthodontists, PEPs have little influence. Patients select physicians on the basis of personal recommendations. Physicians' concerns about negative evaluations on PEPs are unfounded given the low level of awareness of PEPs by the general populace.
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.