Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Challenges and Opportunities in Health Care Management pp 279–290Cite as

A Review of Scientific Evidence for Public Perspectives on Online Rating Websites of Healthcare Providers

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

The importance of consumer-driven quality reporting initiatives, such as provider rating websites, is on the rise in many industrialized countries like the USA, the UK and Germany. Therefore, this essay covers the issue of online rating websites of healthcare providers as internet-based social networking platforms that facilitate peer-to-peer information exchange and subjective patient experience assessments. Since research on these information tools is in its infancy, this essay uses an explorative approach to outline the five most common views on provider rating websites that appear in the scholarly and public debate. Based on an in-depth literature review of the international evidence, the essay reveals that provider rating websites prove to become a major performance indicator for healthcare managers and a useful tool for individual decision-making in provider choice. Besides a thorough reflection on the most common public misconceptions, the value of this essay lies in the provision of significant recommendations for all stakeholders for the future enhancement of provider rating websites.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The German Agency for Quality in Medicine is a joined institution of the German Medical Association and the German National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians.

  2. 2.

    Precisely the Santa Clara University High Tech Law Institute and The Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic at the University of California Berkeley School of Law, USA.

References

  • AlGhamdi KM, Moussa NA (2012) Internet use by the public to search for health-related information. Int J Med Inform 81(6):363–373. doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2011.12.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bacon N (2009) Will doctor rating sites improve standards of care? Yes. Br Med J 338(1):688–689. doi:10.1136/bmj.b1030

    Google Scholar 

  • Calvillo J, Román I, Roa LM (2013) How technology is empowering patients? A literature review. Health Expect. doi:10.1111/hex.12089

  • Damman O, Hendriks M, Rademakers J, Delnoij D, Groenewegen P (2009) How do healthcare consumers process and evaluate comparative healthcare information? A qualitative study using cognitive interviews. BMC Public Health 9:423. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-9-423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Groot IB, Otten W, Dijs-Elsinga J, Smeets HJ, Kievit J, Marang-van de Mheen PJ (2012) Choosing between hospitals: the influence of the experiences of other patients. Med Decis Making 32(6):764–778. doi:10.1177/0272989x12443416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellimoottil C, Hart A, Greco K, Quek ML, Farooq A (2013) Online reviews of 500 urologists. J Urol 189(6):2269–2273. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2012.12.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emmert M, Meier F (2013) An analysis of online evaluations on a physician rating website: evidence from a German public reporting instrument. J Med Internet Res 15(8):e157. doi:10.2196/jmir.2655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emmert M, Sander U, Esslinger AS, Maryschok M, Schöffski O (2012) Public reporting in Germany: the content of physician rating websites. Methods Inf Med 51(2):112–120. doi:10.3414/ME11-01-0045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emmert M, Meier F, Pisch F, Sander U (2013a) Physician choice making and characteristics associated with using physician-rating websites: cross-sectional study. J Med Internet Res 15(8):e187. doi:10.2196/jmir.2702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emmert M, Sander U, Pisch F (2013b) Eight questions about physician-rating websites: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res 15(2):e24. doi:10.2196/jmir.2360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Espeland WN, Sauder M (2007) Rankings and reactivity: how public measures recreate social worlds. Am J Sociol 113(1):1–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faber M, Bosch M, Wollersheim H, Leatherman S, Grol R (2009) Public reporting in health care: how do consumers use quality-of-care information? A systematic review. Med Care 47(1):1–8. doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181808bb5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox S (2009) The social life of health information. http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/8-The-Social-Life-of-Health-Information.aspx

  • Fung CH, Yee-Wei L, Mattke S, Damberg C, Shekelle PG (2008) Systematic review: the evidence that publishing patient care performance data improves quality of care. Ann Intern Med 148(2):111–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gluss S, Lohse D (2011) New website exposes move to squelch patient’s online review. http://www.law.berkeley.edu/10910.htm

  • Halasyamani LK, Davis MM (2007) Conflicting measures of hospital quality: ratings from “hospital compare” versus “best hospitals”. J Hosp Med 2(3):128–134. doi:10.1002/jhm.176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hibbard JH, Peters E (2003) Supporting informed consumer health care decisions: data presentation approaches that facilitate the use of information in choice. Annu Rev Public Health 24(1):413–433. doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.24.100901.141005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hibbard JH, Stockard J, Tusler M (2005) Hospital performance reports: impact on quality, market share, and reputation. Health Aff 24(4):1150–1160. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.24.4.1150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huppertz JW, Carlson JP (2010) Consumers’ use of HCAHPS ratings and word-of-mouth in hospital choice consumers’ use of HCAHPS ratings. Health Serv Res 45(6 Part 1):1602–1613. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2010.01153.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jain S (2010) Googling ourselves—what physicians can learn from online rating sites. N Engl J Med 362(1):6–7. doi:10.1056/NEJMp0903473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kadry B, Chu LF, Gammas D, Macario A (2011) Analysis of 4999 online physician ratings indicates that most patients give physicians a favorable rating. J Med Internet Res 13(4):e95. doi:10.2196/jmir.1960

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • KBV (2010) Versichertenbefragung der Kassenärztlichen Bundesvereinigung 2010. In: Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung (ed) vol 2013. FGW Forschungsgruppe Wahlen Telefonfeld GmbH, Mannheim

    Google Scholar 

  • KBV (2013) Versichertenbefragung der Kassenärztlichen Bundesvereinigung 2013. In: Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung (ed) vol 2013. FGW Forschungsgruppe Wahlen Telefonfeld GmbH, Mannheim

    Google Scholar 

  • Lagu T, Hannon N, Rothberg M, Lindenauer P (2010) Patients’ evaluations of health care providers in the era of social networking: an analysis of physician-rating websites. J Gen Intern Med 25(9):942–946. doi:10.1007/s11606-010-1383-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lieber R (2012) The web is awash in reviews, but not for doctors. Here’s why. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/10/your-money/why-the-web-lacks-authoritative-reviews-of-doctors.html

  • López A, Detz A, Ratanawongsa N, Sarkar U (2012) What patients say about their doctors online: a qualitative content analysis. J Gen Intern Med 27(6):685–692. doi:10.1007/s11606-011-1958-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall MN, Shekelle PG, Leatherman S, Brook RH (2000) The public release of performance data: what do we expect to gain? A review of the evidence. JAMA 283(14):1866–1874. doi:10.1001/jama.283.14.1866

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masum H, Tovey M (eds) (2011) The reputation society: how online opinions are reshaping the offline world. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • McCartney M (2009) Will doctor rating sites improve the quality of care? No. Br Med J 338(1):338–339. doi:10.1136/bmj.b1033

    Google Scholar 

  • Pasternak A, Scherger JE (2009) Online reviews of physicians: what are your patients posting about you? Fam Pract Manag 3(16):9–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Reimann S, Strech D (2010) The representation of patient experience and satisfaction in physician rating sites. A criteria-based analysis of English- and German-language sites. BMC Health Serv Res 10(1):332. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-10-332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothberg MB, Morsi E, Benjamin EM, Pekow PS, Lindenauer PK (2008) Choosing the best hospital: the limitations of public quality reporting. Health Aff 27(6):1680–1687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaefer C, Schwarz S (2010) Wer findet die besten Ärzte Deutschlands? Arztbewertungsportale im Internet. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes 104(7):572–577. doi:10.1016/j.zefq.2010.09.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Segal J (2009) The role of the internet in doctor performance rating. Pain Physician 12(3):659–664

    Google Scholar 

  • Sehgal AR (2010) The role of reputation in U.S. News & world report’s rankings of the top 50 American hospitals. Ann Intern Med 152(8):521–525. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-152-8-201004200-00009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sitzia J, Wood N (1997) Patient satisfaction: a review of issues and concepts. Soc Sci Med 45(12):1829–1843

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thielscher C, Antoni B, Driedger J, Jacobi S, Krol B (2013) Geringe Korrelation von Krankenhausführern kann zu verwirrenden Ergebnissen führen. Gesundheitsökonomie & Qualitätsmanagement. doi:10.1055/s-0033-1335362

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Group InnoTech4Health, TU Dresden, 01062, Dresden, Germany

    Sophia Fischer

  2. Friedrich-Alexander Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany

    Martin Emmert

Authors
  1. Sophia Fischer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martin Emmert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sophia Fischer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Research Group InnoTech4Health, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany

    Sebastian Gurtner

  2. University of Cooperative Education, Riesa, Sachsen, Germany

    Katja Soyez

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Fischer, S., Emmert, M. (2015). A Review of Scientific Evidence for Public Perspectives on Online Rating Websites of Healthcare Providers. In: Gurtner, S., Soyez, K. (eds) Challenges and Opportunities in Health Care Management. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12178-9_22

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation