Prabhu Arpan V, Kim Christopher, De Guzman Eison, Zhao Eric, Madill Evan, Cohen Jonathan, Hansberry David R, Agarwal Nitin, Heron Dwight E, Beriwal Sushil
University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017 Dec 1;99(5):1083-1091. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.08.015. Epub 2017 Aug 19.
Google is the most popular search engine in the United States, and patients are increasingly relying on online webpages to seek information about individual physicians. This study aims to characterize what patients find when they search for radiation oncologists online.
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Physician Comparable Downloadable File was used to identify all Medicare-participating radiation oncologists in the United States and Puerto Rico. Each radiation oncologist was characterized by medical school education, year of graduation, city of practice, gender, and affiliation with an academic institution. Using a custom Google-based search engine, up to the top 10 search results for each physician were extracted and categorized as relating to: (1) physician, hospital, or health care system; (2) third-party; (3) social media; (4) academic journal articles; or (5) other.
Among all health care providers in the United States within CMS, 4443 self-identified as being radiation oncologists and yielded 40,764 search results. Of those, 1161 (26.1%) and 3282 (73.9%) were classified as academic and nonacademic radiation oncologists, respectively. At least 1 search result was obtained for 4398 physicians (99.0%). Physician, hospital, and health care-controlled websites (16,006; 39.3%) and third-party websites (10,494; 25.7%) were the 2 most often observed domain types. Social media platforms accounted for 2729 (6.7%) hits, and peer-reviewed academic journal websites accounted for 1397 (3.4%) results. About 6.8% and 6.7% of the top 10 links were social media websites for academic and nonacademic radiation oncologists, respectively.
Most radiation oncologists lack self-controlled online content when patients search within the first page of Google search results. With the strong presence of third-party websites and lack of social media, opportunities exist for radiation oncologists to increase their online presence to improve patient-provider communication and better the image of the overall field. We discuss strategies to improve online visibility.
谷歌是美国最受欢迎的搜索引擎,患者越来越依赖在线网页来查找有关个体医生的信息。本研究旨在描述患者在网上搜索放射肿瘤学家时所发现的内容。
使用医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)的医生可比可下载文件来识别美国和波多黎各所有参与医疗保险的放射肿瘤学家。每位放射肿瘤学家的特征包括医学院教育背景、毕业年份、执业城市、性别以及与学术机构的隶属关系。使用基于谷歌的定制搜索引擎,提取每位医生最多前10条搜索结果,并分类为与以下相关:(1)医生、医院或医疗保健系统;(2)第三方;(3)社交媒体;(4)学术期刊文章;或(5)其他。
在CMS涵盖的美国所有医疗保健提供者中,有4443人自我认定为放射肿瘤学家,产生了40764条搜索结果。其中,分别有1161人(26.1%)和3282人(73.9%)被归类为学术型和非学术型放射肿瘤学家。4398名医生(99.0%)至少获得了1条搜索结果。医生、医院和医疗保健控制的网站(16006条;39.3%)和第三方网站(10494条;25.7%)是最常观察到的两种域名类型。社交媒体平台占2729次(6.7%)点击,同行评审的学术期刊网站占1397条(3.4%)结果。前10个链接中分别约有6.8%和6.7%是学术型和非学术型放射肿瘤学家的社交媒体网站。
当患者在谷歌搜索结果首页进行搜索时,大多数放射肿瘤学家缺乏自我控制的在线内容。由于第三方网站的大量存在和社交媒体的缺乏,放射肿瘤学家有机会增加其在线曝光度,以改善患者与提供者之间的沟通,并提升整个领域的形象。我们讨论了提高在线可见性的策略。