{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,14]],"date-time":"2026-08-14T10:21:33Z","timestamp":1786702893365,"version":"3.56.0"},"reference-count":19,"publisher":"Oxford University Press (OUP)","issue":"4","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2017,9,8]],"date-time":"2017-09-08T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1504828800000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/academic.oup.com\/journals\/pages\/about_us\/legal\/notices"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":[],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2018,4,1]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n               <jats:sec>\n                  <jats:title>Objective<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>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.<\/jats:p>\n               <\/jats:sec>\n               <jats:sec>\n                  <jats:title>Materials and Methods<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>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.<\/jats:p>\n               <\/jats:sec>\n               <jats:sec>\n                  <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>Across ratings platforms, multivariable models showed no significant association between mean consumer ratings and specialty-specific performance scores (\u03b2-coefficient range, \u22120.04, 0.04), primary care physician scores (\u03b2-coefficient range, \u22120.01, 0.3), and administrator scores (\u03b2-coefficient range, \u22120.2, 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%\u201332% had consumer ratings in the lowest quartile across platforms. Ratings were consistent across platforms; a physician\u2019s score on one platform significantly predicted his\/her score on another in 5 of 10 comparisons.<\/jats:p>\n               <\/jats:sec>\n               <jats:sec>\n                  <jats:title>Discussion<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>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.<\/jats:p>\n               <\/jats:sec>\n               <jats:sec>\n                  <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>Online consumer ratings should not be used in isolation to select physicians, given their poor association with clinical performance.<\/jats:p>\n               <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1093\/jamia\/ocx083","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2017,8,22]],"date-time":"2017-08-22T03:12:26Z","timestamp":1503371546000},"page":"401-407","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":78,"title":["Online physician ratings fail to predict actual performance on measures of quality, value, and peer review"],"prefix":"10.1093","volume":"25","author":[{"given":"Timothy J","family":"Daskivich","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Division of Urology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA"},{"name":"Cedars-Sinai Center for Outcomes Research and Education (CS-CORE), Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Justin","family":"Houman","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Division of Urology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Garth","family":"Fuller","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Cedars-Sinai Center for Outcomes Research and Education (CS-CORE), Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA"},{"name":"Department of Medicine, Division of Health Services Research, Cedars-Sinai Health System, Los Angeles, CA, USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Jeanne T","family":"Black","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Resource and Outcomes Management Department, Cedars-Sinai Health System, Los Angeles, CA, USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Hyung L","family":"Kim","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Division of Urology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Brennan","family":"Spiegel","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Cedars-Sinai Center for Outcomes Research and Education (CS-CORE), Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA"},{"name":"Department of Medicine, Division of Health Services Research, Cedars-Sinai Health System, Los Angeles, CA, USA"},{"name":"Department of Health Policy and Management, UCLA Fielding School of Public Health, Los Angeles, CA, USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2017,9,8]]},"reference":[{"issue":"26","key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2635","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMsa022615","article-title":"The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States","volume":"348","author":"McGlynn","year":"2003","journal-title":"N Engl J Med."},{"issue":"22","key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2117","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMsa035205","article-title":"Surgeon volume and operative mortality in the United States","volume":"349","author":"Birkmeyer","year":"2003","journal-title":"N Engl J Med."},{"issue":"7","key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"734","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.2013.283194","article-title":"Public awareness, perception, and use of online physician rating sites","volume":"311","author":"Hanauer","year":"2014","journal-title":"JAMA."},{"key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"416","DOI":"10.1186\/s12913-015-1099-2","article-title":"Popularity of internet physician rating sites and their apparent influence on patients' choices of physicians","volume":"15","author":"Burkle","year":"2015","journal-title":"BMC Health Serv Res."},{"issue":"8","key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e187","DOI":"10.2196\/jmir.2702","article-title":"Physician choice making and characteristics associated with using physician-rating websites: cross-sectional study","volume":"15","author":"Emmert","year":"2013","journal-title":"J Med Internet Res."},{"key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B6","volume-title":"United Healthcare: Healthgrades Patient Satisfaction Ratings","year":"2016"},{"key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B7","article-title":"Are online physician ratings any good?","author":"Glover","year":"2014","journal-title":"US News and World Report."},{"key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B8","article-title":"The Web Is Awash in Reviews, but Not for Doctors. Here's Why","author":"Lieber","year":"2012","journal-title":"New York Times."},{"issue":"9","key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B9","first-page":"34","article-title":"Online physician reviews: The good, the bad, and the ugly","volume":"98","author":"Ellimoottil","year":"2013","journal-title":"Bull Am Coll Surg."},{"issue":"1","key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B10","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e38","DOI":"10.2196\/jmir.2003","article-title":"A changing landscape of physician quality reporting: analysis of patients\u2019 online ratings of their physicians over a 5-year period","volume":"14","author":"Gao","year":"2012","journal-title":"J Med Internet Res."},{"issue":"5","key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B11","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e146","DOI":"10.2196\/jmir.2280","article-title":"Patients' ratings of family physician practices on the internet: usage and associations with conventional measures of quality in the English National Health Service","volume":"14","author":"Greaves","year":"2012","journal-title":"J Med Internet Res."},{"issue":"2","key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B12","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e50","DOI":"10.2196\/jmir.2005","article-title":"Online doctor reviews: do they track surgeon volume, a proxy for quality of care?","volume":"14","author":"Segal","year":"2012","journal-title":"J Med Internet Res."},{"issue":"2","key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e56","DOI":"10.2196\/jmir.3024","article-title":"Social media and rating sites as tools to understanding quality of care: a scoping review","volume":"16","author":"Verhoef","year":"2014","journal-title":"J Med Internet Res."},{"key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B14","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2477","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMp1011024","article-title":"What Is Value in Health Care?","volume":"363","author":"Porter","year":"2010","journal-title":"New Engl J Med."},{"issue":"4","key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B15","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e95","DOI":"10.2196\/jmir.1960","article-title":"Analysis of 4999 online physician ratings indicates that most patients give physicians a favorable rating","volume":"13","author":"Kadry","year":"2011","journal-title":"J Med Internet Res."},{"key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B16","volume-title":"The RAND\/UCLA Appropriateness Method User\u2019s Manual. Vol 1269-DG-XII\/RE","author":"Fitch","year":"2001"},{"issue":"4","key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B17","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"697","DOI":"10.1377\/hlthaff.2015.1030","article-title":"Yelp reviews of hospital care can supplement and inform traditional surveys of the patient experience of care","volume":"35","author":"Ranard","year":"2016","journal-title":"Health Aff (Millwood)."},{"issue":"3","key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B18","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"194","DOI":"10.1136\/bmjqs-2012-001360","article-title":"The relationship between commercial website ratings and traditional hospital performance measures in the USA","volume":"22","author":"Bardach","year":"2013","journal-title":"BMJ Qual Saf."},{"issue":"10","key":"2020110612232568400_ocx083-B19","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e279","DOI":"10.2196\/jmir.6475","article-title":"Correlating ratings of health insurance plans to their providers' attributes","volume":"18","author":"Shetty","year":"2016","journal-title":"J Med Internet Res."}],"container-title":["Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/academic.oup.com\/jamia\/article-pdf\/25\/4\/401\/34149999\/ocx083.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"syndication"},{"URL":"http:\/\/academic.oup.com\/jamia\/article-pdf\/25\/4\/401\/34149999\/ocx083.pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2020,11,6]],"date-time":"2020-11-06T17:27:51Z","timestamp":1604683671000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/jamia\/article\/25\/4\/401\/4107665"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2017,9,8]]},"references-count":19,"journal-issue":{"issue":"4","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2017,9,8]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2018,4,1]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/jamia\/ocx083","relation":{},"ISSN":["1067-5027","1527-974X"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1067-5027","type":"print"},{"value":"1527-974X","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published-other":{"date-parts":[[2018,4]]},"published":{"date-parts":[[2017,9,8]]}}}