• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

患者关心什么?通过计算机辅助多层次定性分析从在线医生评论中挖掘精细的患者关注点。

What Do Patients Care About? Mining Fine-grained Patient Concerns from Online Physician Reviews Through Computer-Assisted Multi-level Qualitative Analysis.

机构信息

University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA.

Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong, China.

出版信息

AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2021 Jan 25;2020:544-553. eCollection 2020.

PMID:33936428
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8075539/
Abstract

Online physician review (OPR) websites have been increasingly used by healthcare consumers to make informed decisions in selecting healthcare providers. However, consumer-generated online reviews are often unstructured and contain plural topics with varying degrees of granularity, making it challenging to analyze using conventional topic modeling techniques. In this paper, we designed a novel natural language processing pipeline incorporating qualitative coding and supervised and unsupervised machine learning. Using this method, we were able to identify not only coarse-grained topics (e.g., relationship, clinic management), but also fine-grained details such as diagnosis, timing and access, and financial concerns. We discuss how healthcare providers could improve their ratings based on consumer feedback. We also reflect on the inherent challenges of analyzing user-generated online data, and how our novel pipeline may inform future work on mining consumer-generated online data.

摘要

在线医生评论(OPR)网站越来越多地被医疗保健消费者用于做出明智的决策,选择医疗服务提供者。然而,消费者生成的在线评论往往是非结构化的,并且包含多个具有不同粒度的主题,这使得使用传统的主题建模技术进行分析变得具有挑战性。在本文中,我们设计了一种新颖的自然语言处理管道,结合了定性编码以及监督和无监督机器学习。使用这种方法,我们不仅能够识别出粗粒度的主题(例如,关系、诊所管理),还能够识别出诊断、时间和访问以及财务问题等细粒度的细节。我们讨论了医疗服务提供者如何根据消费者的反馈来提高他们的评分。我们还反思了分析用户生成的在线数据所面临的固有挑战,以及我们的新管道如何为挖掘消费者生成的在线数据的未来工作提供信息。

相似文献

1
What Do Patients Care About? Mining Fine-grained Patient Concerns from Online Physician Reviews Through Computer-Assisted Multi-level Qualitative Analysis.患者关心什么?通过计算机辅助多层次定性分析从在线医生评论中挖掘精细的患者关注点。
AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2021 Jan 25;2020:544-553. eCollection 2020.
2
The Voice of Chinese Health Consumers: A Text Mining Approach to Web-Based Physician Reviews.中国医疗消费者之声:一种基于网络医生评价的文本挖掘方法。
J Med Internet Res. 2016 May 10;18(5):e108. doi: 10.2196/jmir.4430.
3
Assessing Patient Experience and Healthcare Quality of Dental Care Using Patient Online Reviews in the United States: Mixed Methods Study.使用美国患者在线评论评估牙科护理的患者体验和医疗保健质量:混合方法研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Jul 7;22(7):e18652. doi: 10.2196/18652.
4
Evaluation of Dermatology Practice Online Reviews: Lessons From Qualitative Analysis.皮肤科在线评论评价:定性分析的启示。
JAMA Dermatol. 2016 Feb;152(2):153-7. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2015.3950.
5
A tale of two countries: International comparison of online doctor reviews between China and the United States.两个国家的故事:中美在线医生评价的国际比较
Int J Med Inform. 2017 Mar;99:37-44. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2016.12.007. Epub 2017 Jan 5.
6
What are the main patient safety concerns of healthcare stakeholders: a mixed-method study of Web-based text.医疗保健利益相关者主要关注的患者安全问题有哪些:基于网络文本的混合方法研究。
Int J Med Inform. 2020 Aug;140:104162. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2020.104162. Epub 2020 May 4.
7
Patient assessments and online ratings of quality care: a "wake-up call" for providers.患者评估和在线优质护理评分:给提供者的“警钟”。
Am J Gastroenterol. 2013 Nov;108(11):1676-85. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2013.112.
8
Online physician review websites poorly correlate to a validated metric of patient satisfaction.在线医生评价网站与经过验证的患者满意度指标相关性不佳。
J Surg Res. 2018 Jul;227:1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2018.01.037. Epub 2018 Feb 28.
9
Consumer health information seeking on the Internet: the state of the art.互联网上的消费者健康信息搜索:最新进展。
Health Educ Res. 2001 Dec;16(6):671-92. doi: 10.1093/her/16.6.671.
10
Popularity of internet physician rating sites and their apparent influence on patients' choices of physicians.互联网医生评级网站的受欢迎程度及其对患者选择医生的明显影响。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2015 Sep 26;15:416. doi: 10.1186/s12913-015-1099-2.

引用本文的文献

1
The Use of Natural Language Processing to Interpret Unstructured Patient Feedback on Health Services: Scoping Review.利用自然语言处理解读关于医疗服务的非结构化患者反馈:范围综述
J Med Internet Res. 2025 Aug 14;27:e72853. doi: 10.2196/72853.
2
Using Large Language Models for sentiment analysis of health-related social media data: empirical evaluation and practical tips.使用大语言模型对健康相关社交媒体数据进行情感分析:实证评估与实用技巧
AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2025 May 22;2024:503-512. eCollection 2024.
3
An evaluation of outpatient satisfaction based on the national standard questionnaire: a satisfaction survey conducted in a tertiary hospital in Shenyang, China.基于国家标准问卷的门诊患者满意度评价:中国沈阳一家三级医院的满意度调查。
Front Public Health. 2024 May 9;12:1348426. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1348426. eCollection 2024.
4
Academic entitlement and Ratemyprofessors.com evaluations bias student teaching evaluations: Implications for faculty evaluation and policy-lenient professors' occupational health.学术特权和RateMyProfessors.com网站的评价使学生教学评价产生偏差:对教师评价和政策的影响——宽松型教授的职业健康。
Heliyon. 2024 Apr 14;10(8):e29473. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e29473. eCollection 2024 Apr 30.
5
A sentiment analysis on online psychiatrist reviews to identify clinical attributes of psychiatrists that shape the therapeutic alliance.一项关于在线精神科医生评价的情感分析,以确定塑造治疗联盟的精神科医生的临床特征。
Front Psychiatry. 2023 Jun 15;14:1174154. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1174154. eCollection 2023.
6
A sentiment analysis driven method based on public and personal preferences with correlated attributes to select online doctors.一种基于公众和个人偏好以及相关属性的情感分析驱动方法,用于选择在线医生。
Appl Intell (Dordr). 2023 Feb 20:1-22. doi: 10.1007/s10489-023-04485-9.
7
Exploring Online Health Reviews to Monitor COVID-19 Public Health Responses in Alabama State Department of Corrections: Case Example.探索在线健康评论以监测阿拉巴马州惩教部对新冠疫情的公共卫生应对措施:案例分析
JMIR Form Res. 2021 Nov 10;5(11):e32591. doi: 10.2196/32591.

本文引用的文献

1
Online physician ratings fail to predict actual performance on measures of quality, value, and peer review.在线医生评级未能预测实际的质量、价值和同行评审措施的表现。
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018 Apr 1;25(4):401-407. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocx083.
2
Patient complaints about hospital services: applying a complaint taxonomy to analyse and respond to complaints.患者对医院服务的投诉:应用投诉分类法分析和回应投诉。
Int J Qual Health Care. 2016 Apr;28(2):240-5. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzw003. Epub 2016 Jan 29.
3
What do patients say about emergency departments in online reviews? A qualitative study.患者在在线评论中如何评价急诊科?一项定性研究。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2016 Jan;25(1):14-24. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004035. Epub 2015 Jul 24.
4
A large-scale quantitative analysis of latent factors and sentiment in online doctor reviews.在线医生评价中潜在因素与情感的大规模定量分析。
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014 Nov-Dec;21(6):1098-103. doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2014-002711. Epub 2014 Jun 10.
5
Patient complaints in healthcare systems: a systematic review and coding taxonomy.医疗保健系统中的患者投诉:系统评价与编码分类法
BMJ Qual Saf. 2014 Aug;23(8):678-89. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2013-002437. Epub 2014 May 29.
6
A changing landscape of physician quality reporting: analysis of patients' online ratings of their physicians over a 5-year period.医生质量报告的变化态势:对患者在5年期间对其医生的在线评分的分析
J Med Internet Res. 2012 Feb 24;14(1):e38. doi: 10.2196/jmir.2003.
7
What patients say about their doctors online: a qualitative content analysis.患者在网上对医生的评价:一项定性内容分析。
J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Jun;27(6):685-92. doi: 10.1007/s11606-011-1958-4. Epub 2012 Jan 4.
8
Analysis of 4999 online physician ratings indicates that most patients give physicians a favorable rating.对4999份在线医生评分的分析表明,大多数患者给医生的评分是正面的。
J Med Internet Res. 2011 Nov 16;13(4):e95. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1960.
9
The importance of physician listening from the patients' perspective: enhancing diagnosis, healing, and the doctor-patient relationship.从患者角度看医生倾听的重要性:增强诊断、治疗效果和医患关系。
Patient Educ Couns. 2011 Dec;85(3):369-74. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.01.028. Epub 2011 Feb 18.
10
How do patients choose physicians? Evidence from a national survey of enrollees in employment-related health plans.患者如何选择医生?来自一项针对参加与就业相关健康计划的参保人的全国性调查的证据。
Health Serv Res. 2003 Apr;38(2):711-32. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.00141.