IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i21p11226-d664897.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Examining Different Factors in Web-Based Patients’ Decision-Making Process: Systematic Review on Digital Platforms for Clinical Decision Support System

Author

Listed:
  • Adnan Muhammad Shah

    (Department of Computing Engineering, Gachon University, Seoul 13120, Korea
    Department of Physics, Charles E. Schmidt College of Science, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL 33431-0991, USA
    Department of Management Sciences, Shaheed Zulfikar Ali Bhutto Institute of Science and Technology, Islamabad 44320, Pakistan)

  • Wazir Muhammad

    (Department of Physics, Charles E. Schmidt College of Science, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL 33431-0991, USA)

  • Kangyoon Lee

    (Department of Computing Engineering, Gachon University, Seoul 13120, Korea)

  • Rizwan Ali Naqvi

    (Department of Unmanned Vehicle Engineering, Sejong University, Seoul 05006, Korea)

Abstract

(1) Background: The appearance of physician rating websites (PRWs) has raised researchers’ interest in the online healthcare field, particularly how users consume information available on PRWs in terms of online physician reviews and providers’ information in their decision-making process. The aim of this study is to consistently review the early scientific literature related to digital healthcare platforms, summarize key findings and study features, identify literature deficiencies, and suggest digital solutions for future research. (2) Methods: A systematic literature review using key databases was conducted to search published articles between 2010 and 2020 and identified 52 papers that focused on PRWs, different signals in the form of PRWs’ features, the findings of these studies, and peer-reviewed articles. The research features and main findings are reported in tables and figures. (3) Results: The review of 52 papers identified 22 articles for online reputation, 15 for service popularity, 16 for linguistic features, 15 for doctor–patient concordance, 7 for offline reputation, and 11 for trustworthiness signals. Out of 52 studies, 75% used quantitative techniques, 12% employed qualitative techniques, and 13% were mixed-methods investigations. The majority of studies retrieved larger datasets using machine learning techniques (44/52). These studies were mostly conducted in China (38), the United States (9), and Europe (3). The majority of signals were positively related to the clinical outcomes. Few studies used conventional surveys of patient treatment experience (5, 9.61%), and few used panel data (9, 17%). These studies found a high degree of correlation between these signals with clinical outcomes. (4) Conclusions: PRWs contain valuable signals that provide insights into the service quality and patient treatment choice, yet it has not been extensively used for evaluating the quality of care. This study offers implications for researchers to consider digital solutions such as advanced machine learning and data mining techniques to test hypotheses regarding a variety of signals on PRWs for clinical decision-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Adnan Muhammad Shah & Wazir Muhammad & Kangyoon Lee & Rizwan Ali Naqvi, 2021. "Examining Different Factors in Web-Based Patients’ Decision-Making Process: Systematic Review on Digital Platforms for Clinical Decision Support System," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-23, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:21:p:11226-:d:664897
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/21/11226/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/21/11226/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peng Luo & Kun Chen & Chong Wu & Yongli Li, 2018. "Exploring the social influence of multichannel access in an online health community," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 69(1), pages 98-109, January.
    2. Yu Tong & Chuan-Hoo Tan & Hock-Hai Teo, 2017. "Direct and Indirect Information System Use: A Multimethod Exploration of Social Power Antecedents in Healthcare," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(4), pages 690-710, December.
    3. Susan F. Lu & Huaxia Rui, 2018. "Can We Trust Online Physician Ratings? Evidence from Cardiac Surgeons in Florida," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(6), pages 2557-2573, June.
    4. Brad N. Greenwood & Ritu Agarwal & Rajshree Agarwal & Anandasivam Gopal, 2019. "The Role of Individual and Organizational Expertise in the Adoption of New Practices," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(1), pages 191-213, February.
    5. Wu, Hong & Deng, Zhaohua, 2019. "Knowledge collaboration among physicians in online health communities: A transactive memory perspective," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 13-33.
    6. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    7. George A. Akerlof, 1970. "The Market for "Lemons": Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500.
    8. Shanshan Guo & Xitong Guo & Xiaofei Zhang & Doug Vogel, 2018. "Doctor–patient relationship strength’s impact in an online healthcare community," Information Technology for Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(2), pages 279-300, April.
    9. Hampshire, Kate & Hamill, Heather & Mariwah, Simon & Mwanga, Joseph & Amoako-Sakyi, Daniel, 2017. "The application of Signalling Theory to health-related trust problems: The example of herbal clinics in Ghana and Tanzania," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 109-118.
    10. Anne-Françoise Audrain-Pontevia & Loick Menvielle & Myriam Ertz, 2019. "Effects of Three Antecedents of Patient Compliance for Users of Peer-to-Peer Online Health Communities: Cross-Sectional Study," Post-Print hal-02866074, HAL.
    11. Catherine Tucker & Juanjuan Zhang, 2011. "How Does Popularity Information Affect Choices? A Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 828-842, May.
    12. Nancy K. Lankton & D. Harrison McKnight & Ryan T. Wright & Jason Bennett Thatcher, 2016. "Research Note—Using Expectation Disconfirmation Theory and Polynomial Modeling to Understand Trust in Technology," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 197-213, March.
    13. Özalp Özer & Upender Subramanian & Yu Wang, 2018. "Information Sharing, Advice Provision, or Delegation: What Leads to Higher Trust and Trustworthiness?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 474-493, January.
    14. Nan Liu & Stacey R. Finkelstein & Margaret E. Kruk & David Rosenthal, 2018. "When Waiting to See a Doctor Is Less Irritating: Understanding Patient Preferences and Choice Behavior in Appointment Scheduling," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(5), pages 1975-1996, May.
    15. Michael Luca & Georgios Zervas, 2016. "Fake It Till You Make It: Reputation, Competition, and Yelp Review Fraud," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(12), pages 3412-3427, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jiang Shen & Bang An & Man Xu & Dan Gan & Ting Pan, 2022. "Internal or External Word-of-Mouth (WOM), Why Do Patients Choose Doctors on Online Medical Services (OMSs) Single Platform in China?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-14, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ting Li & Robert J. Kauffman & Eric van Heck & Peter Vervest & Benedict G. C. Dellaert, 2014. "Consumer Informedness and Firm Information Strategy," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 345-363, June.
    2. Theodoros Lappas & Gaurav Sabnis & Georgios Valkanas, 2016. "The Impact of Fake Reviews on Online Visibility: A Vulnerability Assessment of the Hotel Industry," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 940-961, December.
    3. Amy Wenxuan Ding & Shibo Li, 2019. "Herding in the consumption and purchase of digital goods and moderators of the herding bias," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 460-478, May.
    4. Paul Belleflamme & Martin Peitz, 2018. "Inside the Engine Room of Digital Platforms: Reviews, Ratings, and Recommendations," Working Papers halshs-01714549, HAL.
    5. Aishwarya Deep Shukla & Guodong (Gordon) Gao & Ritu Agarwal, 2021. "How Digital Word-of-Mouth Affects Consumer Decision Making: Evidence from Doctor Appointment Booking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 1546-1568, March.
    6. Strittmatter, Anthony & Lechner, Michael, 2020. "Sorting in the used-car market after the Volkswagen emission scandal," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    7. Kerschbamer, Rudolf & Neururer, Daniel & Sutter, Matthias, 2019. "Credence Goods Markets and the Informational Value of New Media: A Natural Field Experiment," IZA Discussion Papers 12184, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Ben Jabeur, Sami & Ballouk, Hossein & Ben Arfi, Wissal & Sahut, Jean-Michel, 2023. "Artificial intelligence applications in fake review detection: Bibliometric analysis and future avenues for research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    9. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899.
    10. Adnan Muhammad Shah & Rizwan Ali Naqvi & Ok-Ran Jeong, 2021. "The Impact of Signals Transmission on Patients’ Choice through E-Consultation Websites: An Econometric Analysis of Secondary Datasets," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-21, May.
    11. Li, Yuanshuo & Zhang, Zili & Pedersen, Susanne & Liu, Xudong & Zhang, Ziqiong, 2023. "The influence of relative popularity on negative fake reviews: A case study on restaurant reviews," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    12. Naveen Kumar & Liangfei Qiu & Subodha Kumar, 2018. "Exit, Voice, and Response on Digital Platforms: An Empirical Investigation of Online Management Response Strategies," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 849-870, December.
    13. Ye Hu & Kitty Wang & Ming Chen & Sam Hui, 2021. "Herding Among Retail Shoppers: the Case of Television Shopping Network," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 8(1), pages 27-40, June.
    14. Jorge Mejia & Shawn Mankad & Anandasivam Gopal, 2019. "A for Effort? Using the Crowd to Identify Moral Hazard in New York City Restaurant Hygiene Inspections," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 1363-1386, December.
    15. Li, Feng & Du, Timon C. & Wei, Ying, 2021. "With whom should I work? Ratings consideration for partner selection in a P2P supply chain network," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    16. Danish H. Saifee & Zhiqiang (Eric) Zheng & Indranil R. Bardhan & Atanu Lahiri, 2020. "Are Online Reviews of Physicians Reliable Indicators of Clinical Outcomes? A Focus on Chronic Disease Management," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 1282-1300, December.
    17. Wessel, Michael & Thies, Ferdinand & Benlian, Alexander, 2015. "The Effects of Relinquishing Control in Platform Ecosystems: Implications from a Policy Change on Kickstarter," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 75205, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    18. Assaf Razin & Efraim Sadka & Chi-Wa Yuen, 1999. "An Information-Based Model of Foreign Direct Investment: The Gains from Trade Revisited," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 6(4), pages 579-596, November.
    19. Tisdell, Clem, 2014. "Information Technology's Impacts on Productivity, Welfare and Social Change: Second Version," Economic Theory, Applications and Issues Working Papers 195701, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    20. Konduru, Srinivasa & Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas G. & Magnier, Alexandre, 2009. "GMO Testing Strategies and Implications for Trade: A Game Theoretic Approach," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49594, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:21:p:11226-:d:664897. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.