Application of Patient Sentiment Analysis to Evaluate Glaucoma Care

IF 2.8 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Victoria Vought BA , Rita Vought BA , Ava Herzog , Miriam M. Habiel MD
{"title":"Application of Patient Sentiment Analysis to Evaluate Glaucoma Care","authors":"Victoria Vought BA ,&nbsp;Rita Vought BA ,&nbsp;Ava Herzog ,&nbsp;Miriam M. Habiel MD","doi":"10.1016/j.ogla.2023.12.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>Patients utilize online physician reviews to decide between and rate ophthalmologists. Sentiment analysis allows for better understanding of patient experiences. In this study, Valence Aware Dictionary sEntiment Reasoner (VADER) and word frequency analysis of glaucoma specialist Healthgrades reviews were used to determine factors prioritized by patients.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>Retrospective cross-sectional analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><p>N/A.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Written reviews and Star ratings of glaucoma specialists listed under the Physicians Payments Sunshine Acts were obtained, and demographic information was collected. Valence Aware Dictionary sEntiment Reasoner produced Negative, Neutral, Positive, and Compound scores of reviews, and these were stratified by demographic variables. Word frequency review was applied to determine popular words and phrases.</p></div><div><h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3><p>Star ratings, VADER Compound score of written reviews, and highest word frequencies.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 203 glaucoma specialists and 3531 written reviews were assessed. Glaucoma specialists had an average of 4.26/5 stars, with a mean of 30 ratings per physician on Healthgrades. Most physicians (86%) had overall Positive written reviews (VADER = 0.74), indicating high patient satisfaction. Specialists who were women or had fewer years of practice had higher Compound and Star scores than their respective male and senior counterparts, with statistical significance observed between junior and senior physician Stars (<em>P</em> &lt; 0.001). Repeated words pertaining to the surgery, staff, wait times, and questions were common overall and among the most positive and most negative reviews.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Glaucoma specialist patients value nonclinical factors, such as appointment setting and nonphysician health-care staff members, in their written reviews. Thus, factors beyond clinical outcomes are influential in the overall patient experience and should be considered to improve health-care delivery. These results can also advise ophthalmologists on factors that patients prioritize when evaluating physicians, which influences the decisions of other patients seeking glaucoma care.</p></div><div><h3>Financial Disclosure(s)</h3><p>The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":19519,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmology. Glaucoma","volume":"7 3","pages":"Pages 316-322"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmology. Glaucoma","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589419623002284","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Patients utilize online physician reviews to decide between and rate ophthalmologists. Sentiment analysis allows for better understanding of patient experiences. In this study, Valence Aware Dictionary sEntiment Reasoner (VADER) and word frequency analysis of glaucoma specialist Healthgrades reviews were used to determine factors prioritized by patients.

Design

Retrospective cross-sectional analysis.

Participants

N/A.

Methods

Written reviews and Star ratings of glaucoma specialists listed under the Physicians Payments Sunshine Acts were obtained, and demographic information was collected. Valence Aware Dictionary sEntiment Reasoner produced Negative, Neutral, Positive, and Compound scores of reviews, and these were stratified by demographic variables. Word frequency review was applied to determine popular words and phrases.

Main Outcome Measures

Star ratings, VADER Compound score of written reviews, and highest word frequencies.

Results

A total of 203 glaucoma specialists and 3531 written reviews were assessed. Glaucoma specialists had an average of 4.26/5 stars, with a mean of 30 ratings per physician on Healthgrades. Most physicians (86%) had overall Positive written reviews (VADER = 0.74), indicating high patient satisfaction. Specialists who were women or had fewer years of practice had higher Compound and Star scores than their respective male and senior counterparts, with statistical significance observed between junior and senior physician Stars (P < 0.001). Repeated words pertaining to the surgery, staff, wait times, and questions were common overall and among the most positive and most negative reviews.

Conclusions

Glaucoma specialist patients value nonclinical factors, such as appointment setting and nonphysician health-care staff members, in their written reviews. Thus, factors beyond clinical outcomes are influential in the overall patient experience and should be considered to improve health-care delivery. These results can also advise ophthalmologists on factors that patients prioritize when evaluating physicians, which influences the decisions of other patients seeking glaucoma care.

Financial Disclosure(s)

The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

应用患者情感分析评估青光眼护理。
目的:患者利用在线医生评论来决定是否选择眼科医生并对其进行评分。通过情感分析可以更好地了解患者的经历。本研究使用 Valence Aware Dictionary sEntiment Reasoner (VADER) 和青光眼专科医生 Healthgrades 评论的词频分析来确定患者优先考虑的因素:设计:回顾性横断面分析:不适用 方法:获取根据《医生薪酬阳光法案》(Physicians Payments Sunshine Acts)列出的青光眼专科医生的书面评论和星级评分,并收集人口统计学信息。VADER 对评论进行了负面、中性、正面和复合评分,并根据人口统计学变量对这些评分进行了分层。词频审查用于确定流行词和短语:主要结果:星级评分、书面评论的 VADER 复合评分和最高词频 结果:共评估了 203 名青光眼专家和 3531 份书面评论。青光眼专科医生的平均星级为 4.26/5,每位医生在 Healthgrades 上的平均评分为 30 分。大多数医生(86%)的书面评论总体上是正面的(VADER=0.74),这表明患者的满意度很高。与男性和资深医生相比,女性或执业年限较短的专科医生的综合评分和星级评分更高,初级和高级医生的星级评分之间存在统计学意义(p结论:青光眼专科患者在书面评价中重视非临床因素,如预约环境和非医生医护人员。因此,临床结果以外的因素对患者的总体就医体验也有影响,应加以考虑,以改善医疗服务。这些结果还能为眼科医生提供建议,让他们了解患者在评估医生时优先考虑的因素,从而影响其他寻求青光眼治疗的患者的决定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ophthalmology. Glaucoma
Ophthalmology. Glaucoma OPHTHALMOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
6.90%
发文量
140
审稿时长
46 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信