期刊文章@ 1438- 8871% I JMIR出版公司洞察在线医生评卡塔尔世界杯8强波胆分析论对患者决策的影响:随机实验%A Grabner-Kräuter,Sonja %A Waiguny,Martin KJ %+市场营销和国际管理部门，Alpen-Adria-Universität克拉根福，Universitätsstrasse 65-67，克拉根福，9020，奥地利，43 463 2700 ext 4042, sonja.grabner@aau.at %K医生评论%K医生评级网站%K医生选择%K患者经验%K口碑%D 2015 %7 09.04.2015 %9原始论文%J J医学互联网Res %G英语%X背景:医生评级网站将公开报告与社交网络结合起来，提供了一种有吸引力的方式，用户可以通过这种方式对他们的医生提供反馈，并获得其他患者的满意度和体验信息。然而，关于用户如何评估这些门户网站上的信息的研究仍然很少，关于医生评论对患者选择的潜在影响的知识也很少。目的:本文从潜在患者的角度出发，探讨医生评论的某些特征如何影响评论的评价和用户对被评级医生的态度。我们提出了一个模型，该模型将评审风格和评审数量与评审可接受性结构联系起来，并通过基于web的实验对其进行检查。方法:我们采用了一个随机的2x2受试者之间的析因实验，操纵医生评论的风格(事实vs情绪)和对某个医生的评论数量(低vs高)来检验我们的假设。共有168名参与者收到了一份基于网络的调查问卷，其中包括对牙医搜索场景的简短描述，以及对虚构的牙科医生的操纵评论。为了调查提出的假设，我们使用SPSS version 22的PROCESS宏2.11进行了有调节回归分析和有调节中介分析。结果:我们的分析表明，更多的评论导致了对被评级的医生更积极的态度。 The results of the regression model for attitude toward the physician suggest a positive main effect of the number of reviews (mean [low] 3.73, standard error [SE] 0.13, mean [high] 4.15, SE 0.13). We also observed an interaction effect with the style of the review—if the physician received only a few reviews, fact-oriented reviews (mean 4.09, SE 0.19) induced a more favorable attitude toward the physician compared to emotional reviews (mean 3.44, SE 0.19), but there was no such effect when the physician received many reviews. Furthermore, we found that review style also affected the perceived expertise of the reviewer. Fact-oriented reviews (mean 3.90, SE 0.13) lead to a higher perception of reviewer expertise compared to emotional reviews (mean 3.19, SE 0.13). However, this did not transfer to the attitude toward the physician. A similar effect of review style and number on the perceived credibility of the review was observed. While no differences between emotional and factual style were found if the physician received many reviews, a low number of reviews received lead to a significant difference in the perceived credibility, indicating that emotional reviews were rated less positively (mean 3.52, SE 0.18) compared to fact-oriented reviews (mean 4.15, SE 0.17). Our analyses also showed that perceived credibility of the review fully mediated the observed interaction effect on attitude toward the physician. Conclusions: Physician-rating websites are an interesting new source of information about the quality of health care from the patient’s perspective. This paper makes a unique contribution to an understudied area of research by providing some insights into how people evaluate online reviews of individual doctors. Information attributes, such as review style and review number, have an impact on the evaluation of the review and on the patient’s attitude toward the rated doctor. Further research is necessary to improve our understanding of the influence of such rating sites on the patient's choice of a physician. %M 25862516 %R 10.2196/jmir.3991 %U //www.mybigtv.com/2015/4/e93/ %U https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.3991 %U http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25862516