Online physician reviews: is there a place for them?

Figures & data

Table 1 Characteristics of patients who use web-based physician rating systems

Younger (Age <65) Female Educated (College Degree > High School Degree) Insured Patients with chronic disease Patients with disabilities Patients with multiple comorbidities

Note: Data from these studies. ^8,10

Table 2 Variables found on various web-based physician rating systems

General characteristics of physician/practice	Reviewable characteristics by consumer
Gender Specialty Area of Expertise/Clinical Interests Conditions Treated Hospital Affiliation Addresses of Offices Phone Number Education Residency Fellowship if Applicable Licenses/Certifications/Professional Affiliations Publications/Awards Languages Spoken Years of Experience Insurance Accepted Background check (probationary status/malpractice claims/sanctions/board actions)	Availability Punctuality Bedside Manner/Trustworthiness Knowledge/Clinical Competence Communication/Patient Education Time Spent with Physician Ancillary Staff Scheduling Office Environment/Parking/Location Billing/Costs Recommend to Other Patients Ability to Leave General Comments

Note: Data from these studies.^13,14

Figure 1 Positive versus negative of web-based physician rating systems.^4,5,13,23 Note: Data from these studies.^4,5,13,23

Abbreviation: HIPPA, Health Insurance Portability Accountability Act.

Figure 2 How physicians can use web-based physician rating systems.

Terlutter R, Bidmon S, Röttl J. Who uses physician-rating websites? Differences in sociodemographic variables, psychographic variables, and health status of users and nonusers of physician-rating websites. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(3):e97. doi:10.2196/jmir.314524686918

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Emmert M, Meier F, Pisch F, Sander U. Physician choice making and characteristics associated with using physician-rating websites: cross-sectional study. J Med Internet Res. 2013;15(8):e187. doi:10.2196/jmir.270223985220

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Trehan SK, Daluiski A. Online patient ratings: why they matter and what they mean. J Hand Surg Am. 2016;41(2):316–319. doi:10.1016/j.jhsa.2015.04.01826754195

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Lagu T, Hannon NS, Rothberg MB, Lindenauer PK. Patients‘ evaluations of health care providers in the era of social networking: an analysis of physician-rating websites. J Gen Intern Med. 2010;25(9):942–946. doi:10.1007/s11606-010-1383-020464523

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Manary MP, Boulding W, Staelin R, Glickman SW. The patient experience and health outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(3):201–203. doi:10.1056/NEJMp121177523268647

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Lee V. Transparency and trust – online patient reviews of physicians. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(3):197–199. doi:10.1056/NEJMp161013628099823

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Samora JB, Lifchez SD, Blazar PE; American Society for Surgery of the Hand E, Professionalism C. Physician-rating web sites: ethical implications. J Hand Surg Am. 2016;41(1):104 e1–110 e1. doi:10.1016/j.jhsa.2015.05.03426304734

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar