Evaluations of Dentists on a German Physician Rating Website: An Analysis of the Ratings

Background Physician rating websites have been gaining in importance in both practice and research. However, no evidence is available concerning patients’ ratings of dentists on physician rating websites. Objective The aim of this study is to present a comprehensive analysis of the ratings of dentists on a German physician rating website over a 2-year period. Methods All dentist ratings on a German physician rating website (Jameda) from 2012 and 2013 were analyzed. The available dataset contained 76,456 ratings of 23,902 dentists from 72,758 patients. Additional information included the overall score and subscores for 5 mandatory questions, the medical specialty and gender of the dentists, and the age, gender, and health insurance status of the patients. Statistical analysis was conducted using the median test and the Kendall tau-b test. Results During the study period, 44.57% (23,902/53,626) of all dentists in Germany were evaluated on the physician rating website, Jameda. The number of ratings rose from 28,843 in 2012 to 47,613 in 2013, representing an increase of 65.08%. In detail, 45.37% (10,845/23,902) of dentists were rated once, 43.41% (10,376/23,902) between 2 and 5 times, and 11.21% (2681/23,902) more than 6 times (mean 3.16, SD 5.57). Approximately 90% (21,324/23,902, 89.21%) of dentists received a very good or good overall rating, whereas only 3.02% (721/23,902) were rated with the lowest scores. Better ratings were given either by female or older patients, or by those covered by private health insurance. The best-rated specialty was pediatric dentistry; the lowest ratings were given to orthodontists. Finally, dentists were rated slightly lower in 2013 compared to 2012 (P=.01). Conclusions The rise in the number of ratings for dentists demonstrates the increasing popularity of physician rating websites and the need for information about health care providers. Future research should assess whether social media, especially Web-based ratings, are suitable in practice for patients and other stakeholders in health care (eg, insurance providers) to reflect the clinical quality of care.

[1]  Yutaka Aoki,et al.  Physician gender effects in medical communication: a meta-analytic review. , 2002, JAMA.

[2]  Judith H Hibbard,et al.  Supporting informed consumer health care decisions: data presentation approaches that facilitate the use of information in choice. , 2003, Annual review of public health.

[3]  M. Geraedts,et al.  Hospital quality reports in Germany: patient and physician opinion of the reported quality indicators , 2007, BMC Health Services Research.

[4]  Brad Mackay.  RateMDs.com nets ire of Canadian physicians , 2007, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[5]  J. Hibbard.  What Can We Say about the Impact of Public Reporting? Inconsistent Execution Yields Variable Results , 2008, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[6]  O. Schöffski,et al.  Arzt-Bewertungsportale im Internet – Geeignet zur Identifikation guter Arztpraxen? , 2009 .

[7]  S. Eisenreich,et al.  [Websites to assess quality of care--appropriate to identify good physicians?]. , 2009, Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)).

[8]  T. Lagu,et al.  Patients’ Evaluations of Health Care Providers in the Era of Social Networking: An Analysis of Physician-Rating Websites , 2010, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[9]  D. Strech.  Arztbewertungsportale aus ethischer Perspektive. Eine orientierende Analyse , 2010 .

[10]  C. Schaefer,et al.  [Doctor rating sites: which of them find the best doctors in Germany?]. , 2010, Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen.

[11]  U. Sarkar,et al.  What Patients Say About Their Doctors Online: A Qualitative Content Analysis , 2012, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[12]  Alex Macario,et al.  Analysis of 4999 Online Physician Ratings Indicates That Most Patients Give Physicians a Favorable Rating , 2011, Journal of medical Internet research.

[13]  A. Darzi,et al.  Patients’ Ratings of Family Physician Practices on the Internet: Usage and Associations With Conventional Measures of Quality in the English National Health Service , 2012, Journal of medical Internet research.

[14]  A. Jha,et al.  A Changing Landscape of Physician Quality Reporting: Analysis of Patients’ Online Ratings of Their Physicians Over a 5-Year Period , 2012, Journal of medical Internet research.

[15]  M. Porter,et al.  Chancen für das deutsche Gesundheitssystem , 2012 .

[16]  O. Schöffski,et al.  Public Reporting in Germany: the Content of Physician Rating Websites , 2011, Methods of Information in Medicine.

[17]  D. Strech,et al.  [German language physician rating sites]. , 2012, Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)).

[18]  E. Brähler,et al.  The Internet as a Mental Health Advisor in Germany—Results of a National Survey , 2013, PloS one.

[19]  M. Wensing,et al.  Evaluation of patient perspective on quality of oral health care in Germany--an exploratory study. , 2013, International dental journal.

[20]  Martin Emmert,et al.  An Analysis of Online Evaluations on a Physician Rating Website: Evidence From a German Public Reporting Instrument , 2013, Journal of medical Internet research.

[21]  Uwe Sander,et al.  Eight Questions About Physician-Rating Websites: A Systematic Review , 2013, Journal of medical Internet research.

[22]  Ahmer Farooq,et al.  Online reviews of 500 urologists. , 2013, The Journal of urology.

[23]  Ralf Terlutter,et al.  Who Uses Physician-Rating Websites? Differences in Sociodemographic Variables, Psychographic Variables, and Health Status of Users and Nonusers of Physician-Rating Websites , 2014, Journal of medical Internet research.

[24]  Lisette Schoonhoven,et al.  Social Media and Rating Sites as Tools to Understanding Quality of Care: A Scoping Review , 2014, Journal of medical Internet research.