ArticleThe Iowa orthopaedic journal2022
A Large Number of Reviews on Physician Rating Websites May Reflect Reputation Management.
Article in The Iowa orthopaedic journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Is It Possible to Develop a Patient-reported Experience Measure With Lower Ceiling Effect?Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2025Article
- Visualizing Hospital Management Data in R Shiny-A Case Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- An Orthopedic Healthcare Facility Governance Assessed with a New Indicator System.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
- Evaluation of Social Media Utilization Among Members of the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society: Implications in Practice.JB & JS open accessArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Physicians with a large number of reviews and a high rating may be employing reputation management strategies. Specialists may be more likely than non-specialists to employ such strategies. This should be apparent in a study of online physician reviews on physician rating websites (PRW). Methods: Using one physician rating website, we gathered orthopedic surgeon and family physician reviews. We measured Spearman correlations between the number of reviews and average numerical rating and used chi-squared to test threshold relationships. Results: There were very small negative Spear-man correlations between the number of online reviews and the average numerical rating for orthopedic surgeons (p= -0.097, p-value=<0.001) family medicine physicians (p= -0.170, p-value=<0.001; Figure 2). Physicians with more than 100 reviews had a greater average numerical rating than physicians with fewer than 50 reviews. Orthopedic surgeons are more likely than family medicine physicians to have a large number of reviews and average numerical rating greater than 3. Conclusion: The small fraction of physician with a high number of reviews may be utilizing reputation management strategies, and this seems relatively specific to specialists rather than non-specialists.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35821942PMC9210437What 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.