Previously submitted to: Journal of Medical Internet Research (no longer under consideration since Jan 17, 2022)
Date Submitted: Sep 24, 2021
Open Peer Review Period: Sep 24, 2021 - Nov 19, 2021
(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 Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).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Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited.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.
GP Practice Online Reviews before and after the COVID-19 Pandemic: a Longitudinal Observational Study
ABSTRACT
Background:
The COVID-19 pandemic has brought new challenges to in-person encounters with general practitioners (GPs) and has fostered the use of digital health tools. Patient online reviews (PORs) of health care experience offer a method for patients to feedback on the quality of their care.
Objective:
This study sought to determine the latest trends in patient feedback for English GP practices in the National Health Service (NHS).
Methods:
Publicly available PORs for English GP practices between January 2019 and February 2021 were identified and scraped from the NHS website. PORs were characterized based on numerical star ratings (ranging from one to five) and the polarity of their comments. These measures were also calculated at GP practice level to understand whether patients’ perceptions of their practices are constant across time.
Results:
Of the 58,970 PORs posted between February 2019 and February 2021, 64·6% were positive (defined as a star rating of four or five out of five). After the lockdown measures imposed in April 2020, the share of encounters with GPs rated positively by customers increased. General practices were less likely to reply to their patients’ reviews after April 2020. The relative rank of practices based on their average star rating remained rather constant after the start of the lockdown measures.
Conclusions:
This study demonstrates how PORs can be used to detect instances of particularly good or bad practice. Since GP Patient Survey has been disrupted during the COVID-19 period, this could be another measure for policy makers to track practice quality.
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.