Measuring Regional Quality of Health Care Using Unsolicited Online Data: Text Analysis Study.

Clicks: 389
ID: 81931
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #8 of 54 articles by views in jmir medical informatics

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Regional population management (PM) health initiatives require insight into experienced quality of care at the regional level. Unsolicited online provider ratings have shown potential for this use. This study explored the addition of comments accompanying unsolicited online ratings to regional analyses.The goal was to create additional insight for each PM initiative as well as overall comparisons between these initiatives by attempting to determine the reasoning and rationale behind a rating.The Dutch Zorgkaart database provided the unsolicited ratings from 2008 to 2017 for the analyses. All ratings included both quantitative ratings as well as qualitative text comments. Nine PM regions were used to aggregate ratings geographically. Sentiment analyses were performed by categorizing ratings into negative, neutral, and positive ratings. Per category, as well as per PM initiative, word frequencies (ie, unigrams and bigrams) were explored. Machine learning-naïve Bayes and random forest models-was applied to identify the most important predictors for rating overall sentiment and for identifying PM initiatives.A total of 449,263 unsolicited ratings were available in the Zorgkaart database: 303,930 positive ratings, 97,739 neutral ratings, and 47,592 negative ratings. Bigrams illustrated that feeling like not being "taken seriously" was the dominant bigram in negative ratings, while bigrams in positive ratings were mostly related to listening, explaining, and perceived knowledge. Comparing bigrams between PM initiatives showed a lot of overlap but several differences were identified. Machine learning was able to predict sentiments of comments but was unable to distinguish between specific PM initiatives.Adding information from text comments that accompany online ratings to regional evaluations provides insight for PM initiatives into the underlying reasons for ratings. Text comments provide useful overarching information for health care policy makers but due to a lot of overlap, they add little region-specific information. Specific outliers for some PM initiatives are insightful.
Reference Key
hendrikx2019measuringjmir Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Hendrikx, Roy Johannus Petrus;Drewes, Hanneke Wil-Trees;Spreeuwenberg, Marieke;Ruwaard, Dirk;Baan, Caroline;
Journal jmir medical informatics
Year 2019
DOI
10.2196/13053
URL
Keywords
big data quality of care text mining online data patient-reported experience measures population health management regional care

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.