Park Soo Hwan, Cheng Christopher P, Buehler Nicholas J, Sanford Timothy, Torrey William
Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH, United States.
Department of Psychiatry, Dartmouth Health, Lebanon, NH, United States.
Front Psychiatry. 2023 Jun 15;14:1174154. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1174154. eCollection 2023.
While online reviews from physician rating websites are increasingly utilized by healthcare providers to better understand patient needs, it remains difficult to objectively identify areas for improvement in providing psychiatric care.
To quantitatively characterize the sentiment of online written reviews of psychiatrists to determine clinical attributes that can be strengthened to improve psychiatrists' therapeutic alliance with their patients.
Sentiment scores of 6,400 written reviews of 400 US-based psychiatrists on a US-based online physician rating website were obtained through a natural-language-processing-based sentiment analysis. Relationships among sentiment scores, average star ratings, and demographics were examined. Linguistic analyses determined words and bigrams that were highly associated with reviews with the most positive and negative sentiment.
Sentiment scores were significantly correlated with average star ratings of the psychiatrists ( = 0.737, < 0.001). Psychiatrists who were younger (< 56 years old) and/or practiced in the Northeast had significantly higher average star ratings than those older and/or practicing in the Southwest. Frequency analysis showed that positive reviews most frequently contained "time" ( = 1,138) and "caring" ( = 784) while negative reviews most frequently contained "medication" ( = 495) and "time" ( = 379). Logistic regression analysis revealed that reviews were more likely to be considered positive when they included "great listener" (OR = 16.89) and "comfortable" (OR = 10.72) and more likely to be negative when they included "meds" (OR = 0.55) and "side effect" (OR = 0.59).
Psychiatrists who are younger and located in the Northeast receive more positive reviews; there may be potential for demographic bias among patient reviewers. Patients positively rate psychiatrists who make them feel heard and comfortable but negatively rate encounters centered around medications and their side effects. Our study lends quantitative evidence to support the importance of thorough and empathetic communication of psychiatrists in building a strong therapeutic alliance.
虽然医疗服务提供者越来越多地利用医生评级网站上的在线评论来更好地了解患者需求,但在确定精神科护理方面需要改进的领域时,仍然很难做到客观。
定量描述精神科医生在线书面评论的情感倾向,以确定哪些临床属性可以得到加强,从而改善精神科医生与患者之间的治疗联盟。
通过基于自然语言处理的情感分析,获取了美国一家在线医生评级网站上对400名美国精神科医生的6400条书面评论的情感得分。研究了情感得分、平均星级评分和人口统计学特征之间的关系。语言分析确定了与最积极和最消极情感的评论高度相关的单词和双词搭配。
情感得分与精神科医生的平均星级评分显著相关(r = 0.737,P < 0.001)。年龄较小(<56岁)和/或在东北部执业的精神科医生的平均星级评分显著高于年龄较大和/或在西南部执业的精神科医生。频率分析表明,正面评论中最常出现的词是“时间”(n = 1138)和“关怀”(n = 784),而负面评论中最常出现的词是“药物”(n = 495)和“时间”(n = 379)。逻辑回归分析显示,当评论中包含“出色的倾听者”(OR = 16.89)和“舒适”(OR = 10.72)时,评论更有可能被认为是正面的;当评论中包含“药物”(OR = 0.55)和“副作用”(OR = 0.59)时,评论更有可能被认为是负面的。
年龄较小且位于东北部的精神科医生获得的正面评论更多;患者评论者之间可能存在人口统计学偏差。患者对能让他们感到被倾听和舒适的精神科医生给予正面评价,但对围绕药物及其副作用的就诊体验给予负面评价。我们的研究提供了定量证据,支持精神科医生进行全面且有同理心的沟通对于建立强大治疗联盟的重要性。