Abstract
Physician review websites are known around the world. Patients review the subjectively experienced quality of medical services supplied to them and publish an overall rating on the Internet, where quantitative grades and qualitative texts come together. On the one hand, these new possibilities reduce the imbalance of power between health care providers and patients, but on the other hand, they can also damage the usually very intimate relationship between health care providers and patients. Review websites must meet these requirements with a high level of responsibility and service quality. In this paper, we look at the situation in Lithuania: Especially, we are interested in the available possibilities of evaluation and interaction, and the quality of a particular review website measured against the available data. We thereby identify quality weaknesses and lay the foundation for future research.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
http://www.ratemds.com, founded in 2004, ~ 1,700,000 HCPs, ~ 2,600,000 reviews.
- 2.
http://www.jameda.de, founded in 2007, ~ 275,000 HCPs, ~ 2,000,000 reviews.
- 3.
http://www.pincetas.lt, founded in 2006, ~ 60,000 HCPs, ~ 80,000 reviews.
- 4.
See for more information: http://123.emn.lt/en/, accessed 16/01/2018.
- 5.
See https://cyberbullying.org, accessed: 22/01/2018.
References
Ärztezeitung,“jameda und co: Gericht stärkt Patientenposition bei Arzt-Bewertung” (2018). https://www.aerztezeitung.de/praxis_wirtschaft/recht/article/955200/jameda-co-gericht-staerkt-patientenposition-arzt-bewertung.html. Accessed 22 Jan 2018
Apotheke-Adhoc, “Von Jameda zur Konkurrenz geschickt” (2018). https://www.apotheke-adhoc.de/nachrichten/detail/apothekenpraxis/von-jameda-zur-konkurrenz-geschickt-bewertungsportale/. Accessed 22 Jan 2018
Baraldsnes, D.: The prevalence of cyberbullying and the views of 5-12 grade pupils and teachers on cyberbullying prevention in lithuanian schools. Univ. J. Educ. Res. 3(12), 949–959 (2015)
Bäumer, F.S., Dollmann, M., Geierhos, M.: Find a physician by matching medical needs described in your own words. Procedia Comput. Sci. 63, 417–424 (2015)
Bäumer, F.S., Geierhos, M., Schulze, S.: A system for uncovering latent connectivity of health care providers in online reviews. In: Proceedings of the 21st ICIST, Druskininkai, Lithuania, vol. 538, pp. 3–15 (2015)
Bäumer, F.S., Grote, N., Kersting, J., Geierhos, M.: Privacy matters: detecting nocuous patient data exposure in online physician reviews. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ICIST, Druskininkai, Lithuania, vol. 756, pp. 77–89 (2017)
Beck, A.J.: Nutzung und Bewertung deutscher Arztbewertungsportale durch Patienten in deutschen Hausarztpraxen, Ulm University (2014)
Dpa, Niederlage für Bewertungsportal: Ärztin klagt erfolgreich (2018). https://www.abendblatt.de/ratgeber/gesundheit/article213495565/Niederlage-fuer-Bewertungsportal-Aerztin-klagt-erfolgreich.html. Accessed 26 Feb 2018
Emmert, M., Meier, F., Heider, A.-K., Dürr, C., Sander, U.: What do patients say about their physicians? an analysis of 3000 narrative comments posted on a German physician rating website. Health Policy 118(1), 66–73 (2014)
Emmert, M., Meier, F., Pisch, F., Sander, U.: Physician choice making and characteristics associated with using physician-rating websites: cross-sectional study. JMIR 15(8), e187 (2013)
Emmert, M., Sander, U., Esslinger, A.S., Maryschok, M., Schöffski, O.: Public reporting in Germany: the content of physician rating websites. Methods Inf. Med. 51(2), 112–120 (2012)
Emmert, M., Sander, U., Pisch, F.: Eight questions about physician-rating websites: a systematic review. JMIR 15(2), e24 (2013)
Erentaitė, R., Bergman, L.R., Žukauskienė, R.: Cross-contextual stability of bullying victimization: a person-oriented analysis of cyber and traditional bullying experiences among adolescents. Scand. J. Psychol. 53(2), 181–190 (2012)
European Commission, Digital single market (2018). https://ec.europa.eu/commission/priorities/digital-single-market_en#background. Accessed 26 Feb 2018
Fischer, S., Emmert, M.: A review of scientific evidence for public perspectives on online rating websites of healthcare providers. In: Gurtner, S., Soyez, K. (eds.) Challenges and Opportunities in Health Care Management, pp. 279–290. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12178-9_22
Gao, G.G., McCullough, J.S., Agarwal, R., Jha, A.K.: A Changing landscape of physician quality reporting: analysis of patients’ online ratings of their physicians over a 5-year period. JMIR 14(1), e38 (2012)
Geierhos, M., Bäumer, F.S.: Erfahrungsberichte aus zweiter Hand: Erkenntnisse über die Autorschaft von Arztbewertungen in Online-Portalen, Book of Abstracts der DHd-Tagung 2015, Graz, Austria, pp. 69–72 (2015)
Geierhos, M., Bäumer, F.S., Schulze, S., Klotz, C.: Understanding the patient 2.0. In: Christiansen, H., Stojanovic, I., Papadopoulos, George A. (eds.) CONTEXT 2015. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9405, pp. 159–171. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25591-0_12
Geierhos, M., Bäumer, F.S., Schulze, S., Stuß, V.: ‘I grade what I get but write what I think.’ Inconsistency analysis in patients’ reviews. In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems, Münster, Germany, pp. 1–15 (2015)
Hanauer, D.A., Zheng, K., Singer, D.C., Gebremariam, A., Davis, M.M.: Public awareness, perception, and use of online physician rating sites. JAMA 311(7), 734–735 (2014)
Hinz, V., Drevs, F., Wehner, J.: Electronic Word of Mouth about Medical Services, no. 2012/05, HCHE Research Paper (2012)
Hu, N., Pavlou, P.A., Zhang, J.: Can online reviews reveal a product’s true quality?: empirical findings and analytical modeling of online word-of- mouth communication. In: Proceedings of the 7th ICTD, ACM, Ann Arbor, MI, USA, pp. 324–330 (2016)
Horton, J., Golden, J.: Reputation Inflation: Evidence from an Online Labor Market. New York University, Working Paper (2015)
Lagu, T., Lindenauer, P.K.: Putting the public back in public reporting of health care quality. JAMA 304(15), 1711–1712 (2010)
Muth, S.: Russian as a commodity: medical tourism and the healthcare industry in post-Soviet Lithuania, IJB, Informa, vol. 20, pp. 404–416 (2015)
Sabin, J.E.: Physician-rating websites. Virtual Mentor 15(11), 932–936 (2013)
Skaržauskienė, R., Tamošiūnaitė, A.: Social media and E-health development in Lithuania. In: Proceedings of the 4th ECSM, Brighton, UK, pp. 497–503 (2014)
Stuß, V., Geierhos, M.: Identifikation kognitiver Effekte in Online-Bewertungen. Dhd-Tagung 2015, Graz, Austria (2015)
Terlutter, R., Bidmon, S., Röttl, J.: Who uses physician-rating websites? differences in sociodemographic variables, psychographic variables, and health status of users and nonusers of physician-rating websites. JMIR 16(3), e97 (2014)
Worldatlas: Lithuania Facts on Largest Cities (2018). https://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/europe/lithuania/ltfacts.htm. Accessed 22 Jan 2018
Zhu, F., Zhang, X.: The influence of online consumer reviews on the demand for experience goods: the case of video games. In: Proceedings of the 27th ICIS, AIS, Milwaukee, WI, USA, Paper 25 (2006)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Bäumer, F.S., Kersting, J., Kuršelis, V., Geierhos, M. (2018). Rate Your Physician: Findings from a Lithuanian Physician Rating Website. In: Damaševičius, R., Vasiljevienė, G. (eds) Information and Software Technologies. ICIST 2018. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 920. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99972-2_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99972-2_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-99971-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-99972-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)