Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37457044›Full record

ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2023

What Makes a 5-Star Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Surgeon? An Analysis of Positive Online Patient Reviews.

Morgan E Noel, Nicolas P Kuttner, Zachary Lebaron, Evan H Richman, Sailesh Tummala, Joseph C Brinkman, Anikar Chhabra

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Morgan E NoelDepartment of Orthopedics Wake Forest University, Winston Salem, North Carolina, USA.
Nicolas P KuttnerDepartment of Orthopedics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Zachary LebaronDepartment of Radiology, Creighton University, Phoenix, Arizona, USA.
Evan H RichmanDepartment of Orthopedics, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado, USA.
Sailesh TummalaDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA.
Joseph C BrinkmanDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA.
Anikar ChhabraDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The increased focus on patient satisfaction has led to growth in the use of physician rating websites. Purpose: To analyze the factors associated with online 5-star patient reviews for orthopaedic sports medicine surgeons. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: A total of 70 orthopaedic sports medicine surgeons were randomly selected from the AOSSM website. A search was performed for these surgeons on Yelp.com. All reviews other than 5 stars (of a possible 5 stars) were excluded from the study. Each review was categorized as referring to a surgical or nonsurgical aspect of care, and each comment within the review was categorized as being clinically or nonclinically related. Comments were further subcategorized by specific features such as bedside manner, clinical outcomes, and patient education. Categorical variables were analyzed using the chi-square test. Results: Overall, 400 five-star reviews were included in the study, comprising 1225 total positive comments. Of the 400 five-star reviews, 200 (50%) were from surgically treated patients, and 200 (50%) were from nonsurgically treated patients. Of the 1225 positive comments, 505 (41%) were clinically related, and 720 (59%) were nonclinical. The most common positive clinical comments were for clear treatment plans (191 reviews [48%]), good outcomes (173 reviews [43%]), and providing alternative treatment plans (55 reviews [14%]). The most common positive nonclinical comments were for good physician bedside manner (287 reviews [72%]), friendly/professional staff (194 reviews [49%]), and ease of scheduling (68 reviews [17%]). Conclusion: The majority of 5-star patient reviews left positive comments regarding nonclinical aspects of care such as physician bedside manner and friendly staff. The most common positive comments regarding clinical aspects concerned good outcomes and clear treatment plans. The overall most common positive comment, in both surgically and nonsurgically treated patients, referred to good bedside manner.

Indexed as

orthopaedic surgerypatient satisfactionphysician reviewspositive reviewssports medicine

Identifiers

PMID37457044
PMCPMC10345912

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.