Online physician ratings fail to predict actual performance on measures of quality, value, and peer review
- PMID: 29025145
- PMCID: PMC7646854
- DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocx083
Online physician ratings fail to predict actual performance on measures of quality, value, and peer review
Abstract
Objective: Patients use online consumer ratings to identify high-performing physicians, but it is unclear if ratings are valid measures of clinical performance. We sought to determine whether online ratings of specialist physicians from 5 platforms predict quality of care, value of care, and peer-assessed physician performance.
Materials and methods: We conducted an observational study of 78 physicians representing 8 medical and surgical specialties. We assessed the association of consumer ratings with specialty-specific performance scores (metrics including adherence to Choosing Wisely measures, 30-day readmissions, length of stay, and adjusted cost of care), primary care physician peer-review scores, and administrator peer-review scores.
Results: Across ratings platforms, multivariable models showed no significant association between mean consumer ratings and specialty-specific performance scores (β-coefficient range, -0.04, 0.04), primary care physician scores (β-coefficient range, -0.01, 0.3), and administrator scores (β-coefficient range, -0.2, 0.1). There was no association between ratings and score subdomains addressing quality or value-based care. Among physicians in the lowest quartile of specialty-specific performance scores, only 5%-32% had consumer ratings in the lowest quartile across platforms. Ratings were consistent across platforms; a physician's score on one platform significantly predicted his/her score on another in 5 of 10 comparisons.
Discussion: Online ratings of specialist physicians do not predict objective measures of quality of care or peer assessment of clinical performance. Scores are consistent across platforms, suggesting that they jointly measure a latent construct that is unrelated to performance.
Conclusion: Online consumer ratings should not be used in isolation to select physicians, given their poor association with clinical performance.
Figures




Comment in
-
Letter to the Editor in response to "Online physician ratings fail to predict actual performance on measures of quality, value, and peer review".J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018 Jun 1;25(6):744-745. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocx143. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018. PMID: 29237006 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
References
-
- McGlynn EA, Asch SM, Adams J et al. , The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2003;34826:2635–45. - PubMed
-
- Birkmeyer JD, Stukel TA, Siewers AE, Goodney PP, Wennberg DE, Lucas FL. Surgeon volume and operative mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2003;34922:2117–27. - PubMed
-
- Hanauer DA, Zheng K, Singer DC, Gebremariam A, Davis MM. Public awareness, perception, and use of online physician rating sites. JAMA. 2014;3117:734–35. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources