Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37239695›Full record

ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2023

The Relationship between Internet Patient Satisfaction Ratings and COVID-19 Outcomes.

Jonathan Stanley, Mark Hensley, Ronald King, Neil Baum

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Jonathan StanleyVanguard Communications, Denver, CO 80205, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7920-3673
Mark HensleyHensley Biostats, Seattle, WA 98102, USA.
Ronald KingVanguard Communications, Denver, CO 80205, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3446-1158
Neil BaumTulane Medical School, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA 70112, USA.

Funding

Vanguard Communications n/a
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Our prior research showed that patient experience-as reported by Google, Yelp, and the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey-is associated with health outcomes. Upon learning that COVID-19 mortality rates differed among U.S. geographic areas, we sought to determine if COVID-19 outcomes were associated with patient experience. We reviewed daily, U.S.-county-level-accrued COVID-19 infections and deaths during the first year of the pandemic using each locality's mean online patient review rating, correcting for county-level demographic factors. We found doctor star ratings were significantly associated with COVID-19 outcomes. We estimated the absolute risk reduction (ARR) and relative risk reduction (RRR) for each outcome by comparing the real-world-observed outcomes, observed with the mean star rating, to the outcomes predicted by our model with a 0.3 unit higher average star rating. Geographic areas with higher patient satisfaction online review ratings in our models had substantially better COVID-19 outcomes. Our models predict that, had medical practices nationwide maintained a 4-star average online review rating-a 0.3-star increase above the current national average-the U.S may have experienced a nearly 11% lower COVID-19 infection rate and a nearly 17% lower death rate among those infected.

Indexed as

COVID-19healthcare outcomesonline reviewspatient-reported outcomespatient satisfaction ratings

Identifiers

PMID37239695
PMCPMC10218490

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.