ArticleAdvances in ophthalmology practice and research
Application of sentiment and word frequency analysis of physician review sites to evaluate refractive surgery care.
Article in Advances in ophthalmology practice and research. 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.
- Ophthalmologists' Evaluation by Physician Review Websites-Do Only Soft Skills Matter? A Cross-National Analysis of over 70,000 Patient Reviews.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Early postoperative changes in corneal densitometry after SMILE with 120-μm and 130-μm cap thickness: a comparative study.Advances in ophthalmology practice and researchArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Online physician reviews increase transparency in health care, helping patients make informed decisions about their provider. Language processing techniques can quantify this data and allow providers to better understand patients' experiences, perspectives, and priorities. The objective of this study was to assess patient satisfaction and understand the aspects of care that are valued by patients seeking refractive care using sentiment and word frequency analysis. Methods: Written reviews and Star ratings for members of the Refractive Surgery Alliance Society practicing in the United States were collected from Healthgrades, a popular physician rating website. Surgeons with at least one written review were included in the study. Reviews were scored from -1 (most negative) to +1 (most positive) using Valence Aware Dictionary sEntiment Reasoner (VADER). Reviews were stratified by demographic characteristics, namely gender, region, and years in practice. Word frequency analysis was applied to find the most common words and phrases. Results: A total of 254 specialists and 3104 reviews were analyzed, with an average of 4.4/5 stars and mean 48 ratings each. Most physicians had positive reviews (96%, average VADER = 0.69). Younger physicians (<20 years since residency) had significantly higher Stars rating than senior peers (>20 years) ( Conclusions: Both the average Stars and VADER sentiment score suggest a high satisfaction among refractive patients. Word frequency analysis revealed that patients value non-clinical aspects of care, including interactions with staff, insurance coverage, and wait-times, suggesting that improving non-clinical factors could enhance patient satisfaction with refractive surgery.
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.