Previously submitted to: Journal of Medical Internet Research (no longer under consideration since Feb 19, 2019)
Date Submitted: May 16, 2018
Open Peer Review Period: May 18, 2018 - Jul 13, 2018
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint
Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).
Peer review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.
Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).
Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.
Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.
Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Impact of Patient Crowdvotes Aggregated Service Diversity on Doctors’ Service Sales in Online Health Community: a Retrospective Study
Background:
An increasing number of people visit online health communities to esquire health information with doctors. In the online health community (OHC), patient crowds tended to label and vote the doctors’ specialties with encountered disease. Understanding how patients’ online labels can help us understand the service diversity for patients in online health communities and provide constructive suggestions for doctors serving more patients online.
Objective:
Our goal was to understand: (1) what kind of patterns are the labels of patient crowdvotes aggregated service diversity, including encountered disease labels and online votes, in a OHC? (2) wheather the patient crowdvotes aggregated service diversity make doctors’ service sales difference in OHC? (3) how can managers in OHC perform to improve doctors’ service sales with the feedback of crowdvotes aggregated service diversity?
Methods:
We designed a retrospective study with data collected from the largest OHC (Good Doctor website) in China. We first used descriptive statistics to investigate the patient crowdvotes aggregated service diversity. Then a multiple log-linear relationship was adapted to investigate the main and the interaction impact of service diversity on doctors’ service sales.
Results:
Our sample consists of 9,841 doctors from 1,255 different hospitals widely distributed in China. 18,997,018 patients had been serviced by these doctors since they became members of the study OHC. 704,467 votes of doctors’ clinical specialties were labeled by patient crowds in recent two years (Aug.26, 2015-Aug. 25, 2017). Gini coefficient of serviced patients is very high, 0.626, followed by the volume of votes (0.562). Based on the regression model, we found that the coefficients of the control variables, doctor review rating and clinic title, were 0.810(0.041), and 1.735 (0.027), respectively. For the breadth of voted specialties, volume of votes and degree of voted diversity, the standardized coefficient of the main effect were 0.309 (0.038), 0.745 (0.014) and 0.073 (0.018), respectively. All of the estimates are statistically significant at a 0.1% level.
Conclusions:
Our study provided empirical evidence that the patterns of both the labels of patient crowdvotes aggregated service diversity and doctors’ service sales were of inequality (as illustrated in Lorenz curves) in the distribution of its size of serviced patients in a OHC. Patient crowds’ online labels also leaded to differences in the doctors’ service sales online. The treads of the doctors’ service sales kept increasing as the patient crowdvotes aggregated service diversity increased. Finally, our findings suggested that the higher breadth of voted specialties and degree of voted diversity displayed a greater service sales with a higher review rating, deploying less inequality of Doctors’ service sales.
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.