For the study, researchers looked at 49 literature papers regarding online patient-reported physician ratings and reviews. They implemented a conceptual data quality framework that was designed to analyze the PRW data grouped into four distinct categories:
Intrinsic data quality (accuracy, objectivity, believability, reputation)Contextual data quality (value-added, relevancy, timeliness, completeness, appropriate amount of data)Representational data quality (interpretability, ease of understanding, representational consistency, concise representation)Accessibility data quality (accessibility, access security)
The researchers found that 53% of the sites contained intrinsic data quality errors (accuracy, objectivity, reputation, and believability), and 61% presented contextual data quality issues (relevance, value addition, timeliness, and completeness).
There were also other problems, such as system interfaces that were not easy to understand, as well as questionable security and safety of data.
“There needs to be stricter rules,” Pavankumar Mulgund, PhD, lead author, clinical assistant professor of management science and systems at the University at Buffalo School Of Management, tells Verywell. “We need to avoid anonymous ratings, reveal their business models and source of revenue to the end-users, and flag and remove potentially fake reviews by making use of data science and AI.”
A notable absence of negative ratingsEmotionally charged commentsAnonymous ratings that were not entirely believablePremium-paying physicians were able to hide up to three negative commentsA low volume of reviews and ratingsPositive ratings based on factors that do not involve physician characteristics (ease of getting an appointment, short wait time, staff behaviors)Higher ratings were associated with marketing strategiesThe positioning of positive reviews and rating data on the first pages impact patient perceptionPRW all use different scales to measure physicians making the data difficult to interpret
Can Doctors Control Their Online Presence?
Electronic word of mouth (e-WOM) wields a significant influence over consumer decision making, and healthcare is no exception. Reports estimate that 35% of patients selected physicians based on good ratings, while 37% of people avoided doctors with bad ratings.
However, PRW sites sometimes let doctors purchase a premium subscription that allows them to have more control over the data and reviews that are published.
Mulgund says that many PRW sites offered physicians the ability to remove a few negative comments, place ads, and influence their position among search results with the purchase of a premium subscription. In turn, this influences patients’ perception and sways their healthcare decisions.
“If doctors don’t pay, they have minimal control over what patients post,” Mulgund says. “However, if they don’t pay, they are still able to update their profiles to keep them current. For example, they can update employment changes and new insurance they accept.”
How to Use PRW Sites
Mulgund says that despite the data quality issues of PRW sites, the majority of physician ratings are positive, typically averaging 4.6 out of 5. The platforms let people provide feedback and voice their opinions, which keeps the sites popular.
PRW sites can be a good way to access information on healthcare providers and services, but patients should look carefully at data from multiple PRW sites. “One of the best ways for someone to find a doctor is to triangulate data across several sites,” Mulgund says. “They could also lookup malpractice and physician comparison databases that are provided by the Center of Medicare and Medicaid Services.”
