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
. 2021 Oct 26;18(21):11226.
doi: 10.3390/ijerph182111226.

Examining Different Factors in Web-Based Patients' Decision-Making Process: Systematic Review on Digital Platforms for Clinical Decision Support System

Affiliations

Examining Different Factors in Web-Based Patients' Decision-Making Process: Systematic Review on Digital Platforms for Clinical Decision Support System

Adnan Muhammad Shah et al. Int J Environ Res Public Health. .

Abstract

(1) Background: The appearance of physician rating websites (PRWs) has raised researchers' interest in the online healthcare field, particularly how users consume information available on PRWs in terms of online physician reviews and providers' information in their decision-making process. The aim of this study is to consistently review the early scientific literature related to digital healthcare platforms, summarize key findings and study features, identify literature deficiencies, and suggest digital solutions for future research. (2) Methods: A systematic literature review using key databases was conducted to search published articles between 2010 and 2020 and identified 52 papers that focused on PRWs, different signals in the form of PRWs' features, the findings of these studies, and peer-reviewed articles. The research features and main findings are reported in tables and figures. (3) Results: The review of 52 papers identified 22 articles for online reputation, 15 for service popularity, 16 for linguistic features, 15 for doctor-patient concordance, 7 for offline reputation, and 11 for trustworthiness signals. Out of 52 studies, 75% used quantitative techniques, 12% employed qualitative techniques, and 13% were mixed-methods investigations. The majority of studies retrieved larger datasets using machine learning techniques (44/52). These studies were mostly conducted in China (38), the United States (9), and Europe (3). The majority of signals were positively related to the clinical outcomes. Few studies used conventional surveys of patient treatment experience (5, 9.61%), and few used panel data (9, 17%). These studies found a high degree of correlation between these signals with clinical outcomes. (4) Conclusions: PRWs contain valuable signals that provide insights into the service quality and patient treatment choice, yet it has not been extensively used for evaluating the quality of care. This study offers implications for researchers to consider digital solutions such as advanced machine learning and data mining techniques to test hypotheses regarding a variety of signals on PRWs for clinical decision-making.

Keywords: clinical decision support system; online physician reviews; physician rating websites; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Stages of the literature search process.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Categorization of studies.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Country-wise location of studies.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Physician rating websites used in studies.

References

    1. Schulz P.J., Rothenfluh F. Influence of health literacy on effects of patient rating websites: Survey study using a hypothetical situation and fictitious doctors. J. Med. Internet Res. 2020;22:e14134. doi: 10.2196/14134. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hanauer D.A., Zheng K., Singer D.C., Gebremariam A., Davis M.M. Public Awareness, Perception, and Use of Online Physician Rating Sites. JAMA. 2014;311:734–735. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.283194. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bidmon S., Elshiewy O., Terlutter R., Boztug Y. What patients value in physicians: Analyzing drivers of patient satisfaction using physician-rating website data. J. Med. Internet Res. 2020;22:e13830. doi: 10.2196/13830. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wallace B.C., Paul M.J., Sarkar U., Trikalinos T.A., Dredze M. A large-scale quantitative analysis of latent factors and sentiment in online doctor reviews. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2014;21:1098–1103. doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2014-002711. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shah A.M., Yan X., Shah S.A.A., Shah S.J., Mamirkulova G. Exploring the impact of online information signals in leveraging the economic returns of physicians. J. Biomed. Inform. 2019;98:103272. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103272. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources