ArticleJournal of hand surgery global online2025
"They Gave Me One Star?" An Analysis of Online Reviews of Hand Surgeons.
Article in Journal of hand surgery global online, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Measures of patient satisfaction are growing in importance. Patients can use online review websites as opportunities to both praise and criticize their physicians and health care experience. We examined "one star" reviews of American Society for Surgery of the Hand (ASSH) members, with the hypothesis that the types of complaints would differ based on patient management and physician gender (based on social identity). Methods: We assembled a list of ASSH members in the Midwest region using the ASSH "Find a Hand Surgeon" tool. We then screened three online physician rating websites, including Yelp.com, Healthgrades.com, and Vitals.com, for physician profiles and related one-star reviews with comments attached. Two independent reviewers graded each comment using a standardized complaint key and came to an agreed score for each comment. Results: A total of 582 physicians were evaluated. We identified 1,295 one-star comments containing 3,256 individual complaints. The most frequently cited complaint regarded physician bedside manner/professionalism, present in 906 out of 1,295 (70%) comments. Nonsurgical patients had a greater number of complaints related to physician management style and office dynamics, specifically physician communication, bedside manner/professionalism, evaluation, time spent with patient, wait time and scheduling compared to surgical patients. However, surgical patients had more complaints per comment (3.17 Conclusions: Nonsurgical patients focus on their care process as a whole, including physician style and visit experience, whereas surgical patients center on outcomes of care. The gender of the hand surgeon may influence the nature of patient reviews, as evaluations of men physicians more frequently focused on aspects of visit experience, such as staff interactions. Type of study/level of evidence: Prognostic V.
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.