Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30900997›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2019

Investigating the Effect of Paid and Free Feedback About Physicians' Telemedicine Services on Patients' and Physicians' Behaviors: Panel Data Analysis.

Hualong Yang, Xiaofei Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Seeking or contributing? Evidence of knowledge sharing behaviours in promoting patients' perceived value of online health communities.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    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

2 authors.

Hualong YangSchool of Management, Guangdong University of Technology, Guangzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0001-6798-1833
Xiaofei ZhangBusiness School, Nankai Univeristy, Tianjin, China.ORCID 0000-0002-6539-7366

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn recent years, paid online patient-physician interaction has been incorporated into the telemedicine markets. With the development of telemedicine and telemedicine services, online feedback has been widely applied, helping other patients to identify quality services. Recently, in China, a new type of service feedback has been applied to the telemedicine markets, namely, paid feedback. Patients who are satisfied with a physician's online service can buy a virtual gift or give a tip to the physicians. This paid feedback can improve the reliability of service feedback and reduce the proportion of false information because it increases the cost for feedback providers. Paid online feedback can benefit the physicians, such as by providing them with monetary incentives; however, research on the impacts and value of such paid feedback from the physician perspective in the telemedicine markets is scant. To fill this research gap, this study was designed to understand the role of paid feedback by developing a research model based on the theories of signaling and self-determination.

objectiveThis study aimed to explore the effects of free and paid feedback on patients' choice and physicians' behaviors as well as to investigate the substitute relationship between these 2 types of feedback in the telemedicine markets.

methodsA JAVA software program was used to collect online patient-doctor interaction data over a 6-month period from a popular telemedicine market in China (Good Physician Online). This study drew on a 2-equation panel model to test the hypotheses. Both fixed and random effect models were used to estimate the combined effects of paid feedback and free feedback on patients' choice and physicians' contribution. Finally, the Hausman test was adopted to investigate which model is better to explain our empirical results.

resultsThe results of this study show that paid feedback has a stronger effect on patients' choice (a

conclusionsOur findings contribute to the extant literature on service feedback in the telemedicine markets and provide insight for relevant stakeholders into how to design an effective feedback mechanism to improve patients' service experience and physicians' engagement.

Indexed as

Data AnalysisDecision MakingFeedbackFemaleHumansMalePatientsPhysiciansReproducibility of ResultsTelemedicinedecision makingfeedbackhealth care qualityphysician ratingphysicians’ contributiontelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID30900997
PMCPMC6450473

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.