Can We Trust Online Physician Ratings? Evidence from Cardiac Surgeons in Florida

References

• Aleccia JN (2010) Docs seek to stifle patients’ rants on Web sites. NBC News (January 13), http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34794632/ns/health-health_care/.Google Scholar
• Arrow KJ (1963) Uncertainty and the welfare economics of medical-care. Amer. Econom. Rev. 53(5):941–73.Google Scholar
• Berger J, Milkman KL (2012) What makes online content viral? J. Marketing Res. 49(2):192–205.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blau DM, Hagy AP (1998) The demand for quality in child care. J. Political Econom. 106(1):104–146.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cabral L, Hortacsu A (2010) The dynamics of seller reputation: Evidence from eBay. J. Industrial Econom. 58(1):54–78.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cameron SV, Taber C (2004) Estimation of educational borrowing constraints using returns to schooling. J. Political Econom. 112(1):132–182.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carroll L (2014) Online doctor ratings “important” to patients. NBC News (February 18), http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-care/online-doctor-ratings-important-patients-n33166.Google Scholar
• Chan DC (2016) Teamwork and moral hazard: Evidence from the emergency department. J. Political Econom. 124(3):734–770.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chevalier JA, Mayzlin D (2006) The effect of word of mouth on sales: Online book reviews. J. Marketing Res. 43(3):345–354.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chintagunta PK, Gopinath S, Venkataraman S (2010) The effects of online user reviews on movie box office performance: Accounting for sequential rollout and aggregation across local markets. Marketing Sci. 29(5):944–957.Link, Google Scholar
• Clark JR, Huckman RS (2012) Broadening focus: Spillovers, complementarities, and specialization in the hospital industry. Management Sci. 58(4):708–722.Link, Google Scholar
• Dai W, Jin GZ, Lee J, Luca M (2013) Optimal aggregation of consumer ratings: An application to Yelp.com. Working paper, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA.Google Scholar
• Dellarocas C, Wood CA (2008) The sound of silence in online feedback: Estimating trading risks in the presence of reporting bias. Management Sci. 54(3):460–76.Link, Google Scholar
• Dhar V, Chang EA (2009) Does chatter matter? The impact of user-generated content on music sales. J. Interactive Marketing 23(4):300–307.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dranove D (2008) Code Red: An Economist Explains How to Revive the Healthcare System Without Destroying It (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dranove D, Kessler D, McClellan M, Satterthwaite M (2003) Is more information better? The effects of “report cards” on health care providers. J. Political Econom. 111(3):555–588.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Duan WJ, Gu B, Whinston AB (2008) Do online reviews matter?—An empirical investigation of panel data. Decision Support Systems 45(4):1007–1016.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ellimoottil C, Hart A, Greco K, Quek ML, Farooq A (2013) Online reviews of 500 urologists. J. Urology 189(6):2269–2273.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Emmert M, Meier F (2013) An analysis of online evaluations on a physician rating website: Evidence from a German public reporting instrument. J. Medical Internet Res. 15(8):e157.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Emmert M, Sander U, Pisch F (2013a) Eight questions about physician-rating websites: A systematic review. J. Medical Internet Res. 15(2):e24.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Emmert M, Meier F, Pisch F, Sander U (2013b) Physician choice making and characteristics associated with using physician-rating websites: Cross-sectional study. J. Medical Internet Res. 15(8):e187.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fan Y (2013) Ownership consolidation and product characteristics: A study of the us daily newspaper market. Amer. Econom. Rev. 103(5):1598–1628.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gao G, Greenwood B, McCullough J, Agarwal R (2011) A digital soapbox? The information value of online physician ratings. Working paper, University of Maryland, College Park.Google Scholar
• Gao G, McCullough JS, Agarwal R, Jha AK (2012) A changing landscape of physician quality reporting: Analysis of patients’ online ratings of their physicians over a 5-year period. J. Medical Internet Res. 14(1).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Godes D, Silva JC (2012) Sequential and temporal dynamics of online opinion. Marketing Sci. 31(3):448–473.Link, Google Scholar
• Greaves F, Pape UJ, Lee H, Smith DM, Darzi A, Majeed A, Millett C (2012) Patients’ ratings of family physician practices on the Internet: Usage and associations with conventional measures of quality in the English National Health Service. J. Medical Internet Res. 14(5).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greene WH (1990) Econometric Analysis (Macmillan, New York).Google Scholar
• Gupta S (2008) Can you trust online doctor rankings? CBS News (December 4), http://www.cbsnews.com/news/can-you-trust-online-doctor-rankings/.Google Scholar
• Hannan EL, Kilburn Jr H, Racz M, Shields E, Chassin MR (1994) Improving the outcomes of coronary artery bypass surgery in New York state. J. Amer. Medical Assoc. 271(10):761–766.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hartz AJ, Pulido JS, Kuhn EM (1997) Are the best coronary artery bypass surgeons identified by physician surveys? Amer. J. Public Health 87(10):1645–1648.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hubbard TN (1998) An empirical examination of moral hazard in the vehicle inspection market. Rand J. Econom. 29(2):406–426.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huckman RS, Pisano GP (2006) The firm specificity of individual performance: Evidence from cardiac surgery. Management Sci. 52(4):473–488.Link, Google Scholar
• Hurwitz JE, Lee JA, Lopiano KK, Mckinley SA, Keesling J (2014) A flexible simulation platform to quantify and manage emergency department crowding. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 14(50).Google Scholar
• Jain S (2010) Googling ourselves—What physicians can learn from online rating sites. New England J. Medicine 362(1):6–7.Crossref, Google Scholar
• KC DS, Terwiesch C (2011) The effect of focus on performance: Evidence from California hospitals. Management Sci. 57(11):1897–1912.Link, Google Scholar
• Keller Fay Group (2013) What drives online vs. offline word of mouth: Major differences revealed in new academic study. Blog, Insights (August 26), http://www.kellerfay.com/what-drives-online-vs-offline-word-of-mouth-major-differences-revealed-in-new-academic-study/.Google Scholar
• Lagu T, Hannon NS, Rothberg MB, Lindenauer PK (2010) Patients’ evaluations of health care providers in the era of social networking: An analysis of physician-rating websites. J. General Internal Medicine 25(9):942–946.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lieber R (2012) The Web is awash in reviews, but not for doctors. Here’s why. New York Times (March 9), http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/10/your-money/why-the-web-lacks-authoritative-reviews-of-doctors.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0-reviews-of-doctors.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0.Google Scholar
• Liu Y (2006) Word of mouth for movies: Its dynamics and impact on box office revenue. J. Marketing 70(3):74–89.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lovett MJ, Peres R, Shachar R (2013) On brands and word of mouth. J. Marketing Res. 50(4):427–444.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lu SF (2012) Information disclosure, multitasking and product quality: Evidence from nursing homes. J. Econom. Management Strategy 21(3):673–705.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lu SF (2016) The role of donations in quality disclosure: Evidence from nonprofit nursing homes. Amer. J. Health Econom. 2(4):431–462.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Luca M (2011) Reviews, reputation, and revenue: The case of Yelp.com. Working paper, Harvard Business School, Boston.Google Scholar
• Luca M, Vats S (2013) Digitalizing doctor demand: The impact of online reviews on doctor choice. Working paper, Harvard Business School, Boston.Google Scholar
• Luca M, Zervas G (2016) Fake it till you make it: Reputation, competition, and Yelp review fraud. Management Sci. 62(12):3412–3427.Link, Google Scholar
• Mitra D, Golder PN (2006) How does objective quality affect perceived quality? Short-term effects, long-term effects, and asymmetries. Marketing Sci. 25(3):230–247.Link, Google Scholar
• Mroz TA (1999) Discrete factor approximations in simultaneous equation models: Estimating the impact of a dummy endogenous variable on a continuous outcome. J. Econometrics 92(2):233–274.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mudambi SM, Schuff D (2010) What makes a helpful online review? A study of customer reviews on Amazon.com. MIS Quart. 34(1):185–200.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Painter K (2014) Do you check online doctor ratings? 1 in 4 consumers do. USA Today (February 18), http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/18/online-doctor-ratings/5582257/.Google Scholar
• Rui HX, Liu YZ, Whinston A (2013) Whose and what chatter matters? The effect of tweets on movie sales. Decision Support Systems 55(4):863–870.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rysman M (2004) Competition between networks: A study of the market for yellow pages. Rev. Econom. Stud. 71(2):483–512.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Segal J, Sacopulos M, Sheets V, Thurston I, Brooks K, Puccia R (2012) Online doctor reviews: Do they track surgeon volume, a proxy for quality of care? J. Medical Internet Res. 14(2).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Serruys PW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP, Colombo A, Holmes DR, Mack MJ, Stahle Eet al. (2009) Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease. New England J. Medicine 360(10):961–972.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vermeulen IE, Seegers D (2009) Tried and tested: The impact of online hotel reviews on consumer consideration. Tourism Management 30(1):123–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yang S, Hu MT, Winer RS, Assael H, Chen XH (2012) An empirical study of word-of-mouth generation and consumption. Marketing Sci. 31(6):952–963.Link, Google Scholar
• Wooldridge J (2003) Cluster-sample methods in applied econometrics. Amer. Econom. Rev. 93(2):133–138.Crossref, Google Scholar