Reporting of Patient Experience Data on Health Systems’ Websites and Commercial Physician-Rating Websites: Mixed-Methods Analysis
| Autor: | Aruna Priya, Caroline M Norton, Lindsey M. Russo, Peter K. Lindenauer, Tara Lagu, Sarah L. Goff |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2019 |
| Předmět: |
Male
medicine.medical_specialty 020205 medical informatics public reporting Health Informatics 02 engineering and technology Mixed methods analysis 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Qualitative analysis Public reporting Physicians Surveys and Questionnaires Patient experience 0202 electrical engineering electronic engineering information engineering medicine Humans Narrative 030212 general & internal medicine Original Paper Internet social networking 3. Good health physician reviews Patient Satisfaction Research Design Family medicine Female Psychology Healthcare providers Healthcare system |
| Zdroj: | Journal of Medical Internet Research |
| ISSN: | 1438-8871 |
| DOI: | 10.2196/12007 |
| Popis: | Background: Some hospitals’ and health systems’ websites report physician-level ratings and comments drawn from the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems surveys. Objective: The aim was to examine the prevalence and content of health system websites reporting these data and compare narratives from these sites to narratives from commercial physician-rating sites. Methods: We identified health system websites active between June 1 and 30, 2016, that posted clinician reviews. For 140 randomly selected clinicians, we extracted the number of star ratings and narrative comments. We conducted a qualitative analysis of a random sample of these physicians’ narrative reviews and compared these to a random sample of reviews from commercial physician-rating websites. We described composite quantitative scores for sampled physicians and compared the frequency of themes between reviews drawn from health systems’ and commercial physician-rating websites. Results: We identified 42 health systems that published composite star ratings (42/42, 100%) or narratives (33/42, 79%). Most (27/42, 64%) stated that they excluded narratives deemed offensive. Of 140 clinicians, the majority had composite scores listed (star ratings: 122/140, 87.1%; narrative reviews: 114/140, 81.4%), with medians of 110 star ratings (IQR 42-175) and 25.5 (IQR 13-48) narratives. The rating median was 4.8 (IQR 4.7-4.9) out of five stars, and no clinician had a score less than 4.2. Compared to commercial physician-rating websites, we found significantly fewer negative comments on health system websites (35.5%, 76/214 vs 12.8%, 72/561, respectively; P |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|