在线医生评分与大型医疗系统内部患者提交评分的比较。

A Comparison of Online Physician Ratings and Internal Patient-Submitted Ratings from a Large Healthcare System.

机构信息

Hawaii Permanente Medical Group, Kaiser Moanalua Medical Center, Moanalua Road, Honolulu, HI, USA.

Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.

出版信息

J Gen Intern Med. 2019 Nov;34(11):2575-2579. doi: 10.1007/s11606-019-05265-3. Epub 2019 Sep 17.

DOI:10.1007/s11606-019-05265-3

PMID:31531811

原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6848281/

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Physician online ratings are ubiquitous and influential, but they also have their detractors. Given the lack of scientific survey methodology used in online ratings, some health systems have begun to publish their own internal patient-submitted ratings of physicians.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare online physician ratings with internal ratings from a large healthcare system.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study comparing online ratings with internal ratings from a large healthcare system.

SETTING

Kaiser Permanente, a large integrated healthcare delivery system.

PARTICIPANTS

Physicians in the Southern California region of Kaiser Permanente, including all specialties with ambulatory clinic visits.

MAIN MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was correlation between online physician ratings and internal ratings from the integrated healthcare delivery system.

RESULTS

Of 5438 physicians who met inclusion and exclusion criteria, 4191 (77.1%) were rated both online and internally. The online ratings were based on a mean of 3.5 patient reviews, while the internal ratings were based on a mean of 119 survey returns. The overall correlation between the online and internal ratings was weak (Spearman's rho .23), but increased with the number of reviews used to formulate each online rating.

CONCLUSIONS

Physician online ratings did not correlate well with internal ratings from a large integrated healthcare delivery system, although the correlation increased with the number of reviews used to formulate each online rating. Given that many consumers are not aware of the statistical issues associated with small sample sizes, we would recommend that online rating websites refrain from displaying a physician's rating until the sample size is sufficiently large (for example, at least 15 patient reviews). However, hospitals and health systems may be able to provide better information for patients by publishing the internal ratings of their physicians.

摘要

背景

医生在线评分无处不在且影响深远，但也有其批评者。鉴于在线评分中缺乏科学的调查方法，一些医疗系统已经开始发布自己的内部患者提交的医生评分。

目的

本研究旨在比较在线医生评分和大型医疗保健系统的内部评分。

设计

比较大型医疗保健系统的在线评分和内部评分的回顾性队列研究。

设置

凯撒永久医疗保健系统，一家大型综合性医疗服务提供商。

参与者

南加州凯撒永久医疗保健系统的医生，包括所有有门诊就诊的专科医生。

主要测量指标

主要结果测量指标是在线医生评分与综合性医疗服务提供商内部评分之间的相关性。

结果

在符合纳入和排除标准的 5438 名医生中，有 4191 名（77.1%）同时在线和内部评分。在线评分基于 3.5 名患者的评价，而内部评分基于 119 份调查回复的平均值。在线和内部评分之间的总体相关性较弱（Spearman's rho.23），但随着用于制定每个在线评分的评论数量的增加而增加。

结论

医生在线评分与大型综合性医疗服务提供商的内部评分相关性不强，尽管随着用于制定每个在线评分的评论数量的增加而增加。鉴于许多消费者不知道与小样本量相关的统计问题，我们建议在线评分网站在样本量足够大（例如，至少 15 名患者的评价）之前，不要显示医生的评分。然而，医院和医疗系统可以通过发布其医生的内部评分，为患者提供更好的信息。