Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Nov 20:9:423.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-9-423.

How do healthcare consumers process and evaluate comparative healthcare information? A qualitative study using cognitive interviews

Olga C Damman  1 , Michelle Hendriks, Jany Rademakers, Diana M J Delnoij, Peter P Groenewegen
Affiliations

How do healthcare consumers process and evaluate comparative healthcare information? A qualitative study using cognitive interviews

Olga C Damman et al. BMC Public Health. .

Abstract

Background: To date, online public healthcare reports have not been effectively used by consumers. Therefore, we qualitatively examined how healthcare consumers process and evaluate comparative healthcare information on the Internet.

Methods: Using semi-structured cognitive interviews, interviewees (n = 20) were asked to think aloud and answer questions, as they were prompted with three Dutch web pages providing comparative healthcare information.

Results: We identified twelve themes from consumers' thoughts and evaluations. These themes were categorized under four important areas of interest: (1) a response to the design; (2) a response to the information content; (3) the use of the information, and (4) the purpose of the information.

Conclusion: Several barriers to an effective use of comparative healthcare information were identified, such as too much information and the ambiguity of terms presented on websites. Particularly important for future research is the question of how comparative healthcare information can be integrated with alternative information, such as patient reviews on the Internet. Furthermore, the readability of quality of care concepts is an issue that needs further attention, both from websites and communication experts.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Comparative information on hospital quality concerning hip surgery http://www.independer.nl. The following indicators are shown in this information: 'distance to the hospital', different types of waiting times (numbers), 'quality indicators' (stars and colored icons), 'opinion of family doctors' (stars), and 'opinion of ex-patients' (global ratings). The 'quality indicators' stem -for the most part- from objective performance indicators collected by the Healthcare Inspectorate. The data of 'opinion of family doctors' and 'opinion of ex-patients' are generated by (online) surveys among family doctors and patients.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Comparative information on quality of health plans http://www.kiesBeter.nl. The indicators consist of a global rating (rating and stars) and different quality themes (stars). The data stem from a survey among health plans'enrollees (about their experiences with their health insurer and the received healthcare).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Comparative information on quality and premium of health plans http://www.consumentenbond.nl. The indicators shown are: 'test opinion', 'premium', and 'reimbursement'. The data are generated from health insurers and from research using surveys among health plans'enrollees (about their experiences with their health insurer and the received healthcare).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Schultz J, Thiede Call K, Feldman R, Christianson J. Do employees use report cards to assess health care provider systems? Health Serv Res. 2001;36:509–530. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Harris KM. How do patients choose physicians? Evidence from a national survey of enrollees in employment-related health plans. Health Serv Res. 2003;38:711–732. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.00141. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sofaer S, Crofton C, Goldstein E, Hoy E, Crabb J. What do consumers want to know about the quality of care in hospitals? Health Serv Res. 2005;40:2018–2036. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00473.x. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jin GZ, Sorensen AT. Information and consumer choice: the value of publicized health plan ratings. J Health Econ. 2006;25:248–275. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2005.06.002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hibbard JH, Berkman N, McCormack LA, Jael E. The impact of a CAHPS report on employee knowledge, beliefs, and decisions. Med Care Res Rev. 2002;59:104–116. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources