Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

All online physician ratings are not created equal

Brant Avondet
Patient
October 30, 2014
292 Shares
Share
Tweet
Share

Just yesterday I was searching for a local surgeon, and on one website he had 2 out of 5 stars.  Hardly anyone was recommending him.  Yet prominently featured on another site he had 4.7 out of 5 stars.  Both sites had a good number of reviews.  What’s going on?  Is one site cherry picking the reviews?  Is someone falsifying reviews on one of the sites?  Which reviews can I trust? As I continue to research online physician ratings, one thing is very clear — they can be confusing for the end user.

With the recent push for increased transparency in medical care and the patient experience, online ratings websites are exploding.  Today roughly 80 percent of OB/GYNs and 60 percent  of surgeons have more than 5 ratings across multiple sites.  That is compared to just 4 years ago when a study indicated that only 1 in 6 physicians had any ratings online.

Are sites cherry-picking reviews?

They certainly can, though most state they do not.  Yelp recently successfully defended a claim by four small businesses who claimed extortion when asked to buy advertising in order to “engineer” the positioning of positive reviews higher on Yelp’s page.  Though Yelp denies any wrongdoing, the court dismissed the claim and in essence said that Yelp can do what it wants with the reviews.  It’s unlikely but not farfetched to see something similar occurring in the physician ratings space in the future.  Sites like Vitals.com have stated that they will not post inappropriate (e.g., racist) comments and Healthgrades.com has taken the tact of not posting comments at all.  Despite physicians regularly requesting the removal of negative reviews, if someone crafts a review it almost always gets posted.

Why the difference between sites then?

Something far less insidious than selectively keeping or excluding ratings explains the most of the differences seen across sites.  It comes down to one simple question: “Was the rating actively solicited or not?”  Unsolicited reviews and complaints are those where a survey is not requested, but a patient has such a powerful experience that they feel the need to share their experience with the staff, the hospital, or sometimes even the world (online).  Unsolicited reviews in general are the extremes.

Solicited reviews on the other hand are generated when an office or provider asks the patient to fill out a survey.  This can be via phone, email, or mail request.  It may even be an iPad in the doctor’s office.  Results of solicited reviews in general are much more positive.  This is because a large portion of those asked will fill out a review or survey, even if they do not have an extreme opinion, and in general people are nice and give good ratings.  Of course, nothing is ever simple.  Lines between solicited and unsolicited get blurred when an office has signs posted requesting patients to fill out reviews at one site or post requests to “Tell us about your experience.”

Axes to grind and pretend patients?

Certainly there are examples of suspected manipulation on one site or another by the physician or an angry patient, but they are very few and far between.  Manipulation can only account for a small percentage of the disparities between sites.  Most sites have at least rudimentary and often very advanced methods of detecting and correcting manipulation.  Anecdotally, in cases where I have suspected manipulation by an angry patient or physician the manipulation has typically been isolated to one site.  Indeed, one way to help identify manipulation is to compare the unsolicited ratings on one site to those on another.

So which are better, solicited or unsolicited reviews?

Both are helpful.  One common misperception is that unsolicited reviews are mostly negative.  Surprisingly a study of online unsolicited ratings found that an overwhelming 88 percent were positive.  Both unsolicited and solicited reviews and ratings provided to the hospital or practice have been shown to be reliable predictors of malpractice risk.  This is largely because lawsuits are commonly associated with physician communication issues as opposed to clinical outcomes.  Solicited reviews require a bit more work to cancel out the effect of all the positive reviews inherent to the methodology, but once that is done they are also predictive of malpractice risk.

In a yet unpublished paper, I have examined over 65,000 online physician ratings and found similarly strong correlations between ratings and malpractice risk.  For example, if a surgeon receives poor ratings and finds themselves in the lowest 10 percent of surgeons based on a normalized online ratings score across multiple sites, they likely have roughly four times the claims risk of a surgeon who is in the top 10 percent.   When describing a “high-quality provider,” patients rank elements of the doctor patient relationship even higher than receiving the correct diagnosis and treatment.  Though far from perfect, online physician ratings are an indicator of the ability of the provider to interact well with patients.

How does this all play out?

One thing is for sure, prospective patients know little to nothing about the difference between solicited and unsolicited reviews.  With several of the recent partnership announcements between physician ratings sites, survey vendors, and electronic medical records companies, many sites are beginning to mix solicited with unsolicited reviews making it virtually impossible to objectively compare providers of the same procedure or specialty, even on the same review website.  Increasingly, I believe online ratings sites will differentiate based on the quality and consistency in the methodology of their online reviews.  If they don’t, they risk creating a mistrust in the ratings system and a poor patient experience all together.

Brant Avondet is founder, Searchlight Enterprises. 

Prev

The giants of medicine: An appreciation

October 30, 2014 Kevin 1
…
Next

The problem with wedding planning when you're a surgeon

October 30, 2014 Kevin 6
…

Tagged as: Primary Care

Post navigation

< Previous Post
The giants of medicine: An appreciation
Next Post >
The problem with wedding planning when you're a surgeon

More by Brant Avondet

  • 3 guaranteed ways to improve patient satisfaction

    Brant Avondet

More in Patient

  • There’s no one to drive your patient home

    Denise Reich
  • Dying is a selfish business

    Nancie Wiseman Attwater
  • A story of a good death

    Carol Ewig
  • We are warriors: doctors and patients

    Michele Luckenbaugh
  • Patient care is not a spectator sport

    Jim Sholler
  • Me is who I am

    Michele Luckenbaugh
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • The real cause of America’s opioid crisis: Doctors are not to blame

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
    • Healing the damaged nurse-physician dynamic

      Angel J. Mena, MD and Ali Morin, MSN, RN | Policy
    • The struggle to fill emergency medicine residency spots: Exploring the factors behind the unfilled match

      Katrina Gipson, MD, MPH | Physician
    • Breaking the stigma: Addressing the struggles of physicians

      Jean Antonucci, MD | Physician
    • Beyond the disease: the power of empathy in health care

      Nana Dadzie Ghansah, MD | Physician
    • Deaths of despair: an urgent call for a collective response to the crisis in U.S. life expectancy

      Mohammed Umer Waris, MD | Policy
  • Past 6 Months

    • The hidden dangers of the Nebraska Heartbeat Act

      Meghan Sheehan, MD | Policy
    • The real cause of America’s opioid crisis: Doctors are not to blame

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
    • Nobody wants this job. Should physicians stick around?

      Katie Klingberg, MD | Physician
    • The fight for reproductive health: Why medication abortion matters

      Catherine Hennessey, MD | Physician
    • The vital importance of climate change education in medical schools

      Helen Kim, MD | Policy
    • Resetting the doctor-patient relationship: Navigating the challenges of modern primary care

      Jeffrey H. Millstein, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • Why it’s time to question medical traditions [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • The hidden gems of health care: Unlocking the potential of narrative medicine

      Dr. Najat Fadlallah | Physician
    • The realities of immigrant health care served hot from America’s melting pot

      Stella Cho | Policy
    • The dark side of immortality: What if we could live forever?

      Ketan Desai, MD, PhD | Physician
    • Lazarus: the dead man brought back to life

      William Lynes, MD | Conditions
    • Revolutionizing COPD management with virtual care solutions [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

View 17 Comments >

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

CME Spotlights

From MedPage Today

Latest News

  • Doc Moms, Mind the Gap -- $3M Earning Difference by Sex
  • Clinical Note Writing App Powered by GPT-4 Set to Debut This Year
  • Helping Patients Get Fit -- One Walk at a Time
  • TB Cases Rebound to Near Pre-Pandemic Levels, CDC Data Show
  • Marginalized Groups May Benefit More From Decreasing Air Pollution

Meeting Coverage

  • Switch to IL-23 Blocker Yields Deep Responses in Recalcitrant Plaque Psoriasis
  • Biomarkers of Response With Enfortumab Vedotin in Advanced Urothelial Cancer
  • At-Home Topical Therapy for Molluscum Contagiosum Gets High Marks
  • Outlook for Itchy Prurigo Nodularis Continues to Improve With IL-31 Antagonist
  • AAAAI President Shares Highlights From the 2023 Meeting
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • The real cause of America’s opioid crisis: Doctors are not to blame

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
    • Healing the damaged nurse-physician dynamic

      Angel J. Mena, MD and Ali Morin, MSN, RN | Policy
    • The struggle to fill emergency medicine residency spots: Exploring the factors behind the unfilled match

      Katrina Gipson, MD, MPH | Physician
    • Breaking the stigma: Addressing the struggles of physicians

      Jean Antonucci, MD | Physician
    • Beyond the disease: the power of empathy in health care

      Nana Dadzie Ghansah, MD | Physician
    • Deaths of despair: an urgent call for a collective response to the crisis in U.S. life expectancy

      Mohammed Umer Waris, MD | Policy
  • Past 6 Months

    • The hidden dangers of the Nebraska Heartbeat Act

      Meghan Sheehan, MD | Policy
    • The real cause of America’s opioid crisis: Doctors are not to blame

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
    • Nobody wants this job. Should physicians stick around?

      Katie Klingberg, MD | Physician
    • The fight for reproductive health: Why medication abortion matters

      Catherine Hennessey, MD | Physician
    • The vital importance of climate change education in medical schools

      Helen Kim, MD | Policy
    • Resetting the doctor-patient relationship: Navigating the challenges of modern primary care

      Jeffrey H. Millstein, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • Why it’s time to question medical traditions [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • The hidden gems of health care: Unlocking the potential of narrative medicine

      Dr. Najat Fadlallah | Physician
    • The realities of immigrant health care served hot from America’s melting pot

      Stella Cho | Policy
    • The dark side of immortality: What if we could live forever?

      Ketan Desai, MD, PhD | Physician
    • Lazarus: the dead man brought back to life

      William Lynes, MD | Conditions
    • Revolutionizing COPD management with virtual care solutions [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today iMedicalApps
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

All online physician ratings are not created equal
17 comments

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...