BackgroundMany Web-based health care platforms allow patients to evaluate physicians by posting open-end textual reviews based on their experiences. These reviews are helpful resources for other patients to choose high-quality doctors, especially in countries like China where no doctor referral systems exist. Analyzing such a large amount of user-generated content to understand the voice of health consumers has attracted much attention from health care providers and health care researchers.ObjectiveThe aim of this paper is to automatically extract hidden topics from Web-based physician reviews using text-mining techniques to examine what Chinese patients have said about their doctors and whether these topics differ across various specialties. This knowledge will help health care consumers, providers, and researchers better understand this information.MethodsWe conducted two-fold analyses on the data collected from the “Good Doctor Online” platform, the largest online health community in China. First, we explored all reviews from 2006-2014 using descriptive statistics. Second, we applied the well-known topic extraction algorithm Latent Dirichlet Allocation to more than 500,000 textual reviews from over 75,000 Chinese doctors across four major specialty areas to understand what Chinese health consumers said online about their doctor visits.ResultsOn the “Good Doctor Online” platform, 112,873 out of 314,624 doctors had been reviewed at least once by April 11, 2014. Among the 772,979 textual reviews, we chose to focus on four major specialty areas that received the most reviews: Internal Medicine, Surgery, Obstetrics/Gynecology and Pediatrics, and Chinese Traditional Medicine. Among the doctors who received reviews from those four medical specialties, two-thirds of them received more than two reviews and in a few extreme cases, some doctors received more than 500 reviews. Across the four major areas, the most popular topics reviewers found were the experience of finding doctors, doctors’ technical skills and bedside manner, general appreciation from patients, and description of various symptoms.ConclusionsTo the best of our knowledge, our work is the first study using an automated text-mining approach to analyze a large amount of unstructured textual data of Web-based physician reviews in China. Based on our analysis, we found that Chinese reviewers mainly concentrate on a few popular topics. This is consistent with the goal of Chinese online health platforms and demonstrates the health care focus in China’s health care system. Our text-mining approach reveals a new research area on how to use big data to help health care providers, health care administrators, and policy makers hear patient voices, target patient concerns, and improve the quality of care in this age of patient-centered care. Also, on the health care consumer side, our text mining technique helps patients make more informed decisions about which specialists to see without reading thousands of reviews, which is simply not feasible. In addition, our com...
BackgroundSince the time of Web 2.0, more and more consumers have used online doctor reviews to rate their doctors or to look for a doctor. This phenomenon has received health care researchers’ attention worldwide, and many studies have been conducted on online doctor reviews in the United States and Europe. But no study has yet been done in China. Also, in China, without a mature primary care physician recommendation system, more and more Chinese consumers seek online doctor reviews to look for a good doctor for their health care concerns.ObjectiveThis study sought to examine the online doctor review practice in China, including addressing the following questions: (1) How many doctors and specialty areas are available for online review? (2) How many online reviews are there on those doctors? (3) What specialty area doctors are more likely to be reviewed or receive more reviews? (4) Are those reviews positive or negative?MethodsThis study explores an empirical dataset from Good Doctor website, haodf.com—the earliest and largest online doctor review and online health care community website in China—from 2006 to 2014, to examine the stated research questions by using descriptive statistics, binary logistic regression, and multivariate linear regression.ResultsThe dataset from the Good Doctor website contained 314,624 doctors across China and among them, 112,873 doctors received 731,543 quantitative reviews and 772,979 qualitative reviews as of April 11, 2014. On average, 37% of the doctors had been reviewed on the Good Doctor website. Gynecology-obstetrics-pediatrics doctors were most likely to be reviewed, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.497 (95% CI 1.461-1.535), and internal medicine doctors were less likely to be reviewed, with an OR of 0.94 (95% CI 0.921-0.960), relative to the combined small specialty areas. Both traditional Chinese medicine doctors and surgeons were more likely to be reviewed than the combined small specialty areas, with an OR of 1.483 (95% CI 1.442-1.525) and an OR of 1.366 (95% CI 1.337-1.395), respectively. Quantitatively, traditional Chinese medicine doctors (P<.001) and gynecology-obstetrics-pediatrics doctors (P<.001) received more reviews than the combined small specialty areas. But internal medicine doctors received fewer reviews than the combined small specialty areas (P<.001). Also, the majority of quantitative reviews were positive—about 88% were positive for the doctors' treatment effect measure and 91% were positive for the bedside manner measure. This was the case for the four major specialty areas, which had the most number of doctors—internal medicine, gynecology-obstetrics-pediatrics, surgery, and traditional Chinese medicine.ConclusionsLike consumers in the United States and Europe, Chinese consumers have started to use online doctor reviews. Similar to previous research on other countries’ online doctor reviews, the online reviews in China covered almost every medical specialty, and most of the reviews were positive even though all of the reviewing procedures and the final ava...
This study empirically examines the opinion leader effects on a mobile clinical information technology implementation by physicians in an American community health system using a fixed effect regression model. The model result suggests that the opinion leader effects are statistically significant during this information technology implementation process. Quantitatively, if opinion leaders increase their technology usage by 10 percent, the physicians who work closely with those opinion leaders would increase their technology usage by 3.5 percent, after controlling for physician individual-level fixed effects, time effects, working environment, and workload. This empirical result of opinion leader effects provides policy implications such as, if a healthcare system wants to promote a new information technology or a new mobile information technology implementation within their organization, they should leverage this opinion leader effects.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.