Accepted for/Published in: Online Journal of Public Health Informatics
Date Submitted: Jan 24, 2025
Open Peer Review Period: Feb 12, 2025 - Apr 9, 2025
Date Accepted: Sep 4, 2025
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
Understanding Patient Perceptions of Bacterial Vaginosis Treatments: A Mixed Methods Sentiment Analysis Study of Online Drug Review Forums
ABSTRACT
Background:
Bacterial vaginosis (BV) is the most common cause of vaginal discharge in people of childbearing age in the United States (US). More information about what patients do and do not like about the most common BV products and the extent to which they reduced BV symptoms is an important step to understanding patients’ health and the current treatment landscape for BV.
Objective:
Using data from online drug reviews forums, this study’s objectives were to (1) quantitatively characterize the patient voice via sentiments (positive to negative) and emotions about the three most common Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved treatments for BV: oral metronidazole (OM), vaginal metronidazole (VM), vaginal clindamycin (VC) ; and (2) to qualitatively summarize themes characterizing the patient-perceived impact of BV and BV products.
Methods:
Data for this mixed methods descriptive study came from 1,645 users reviews of BV products posted on WebMD.com and Drugs.com. Reviewer attributes, reviewer submitted star ratings, and sentiment analysis using word-emotion association were analyzed with descriptive statistics and bivariate associations. A traditional qualitative analysis using qualitative description was also examined.
Results:
Most reviewers were female (99%), between the ages of 18-44 years, and reported using product less than one month, though qualitative results suggested most reported recurrent BV infections. Quantitative results suggest reviewers preferred vaginal products. Mean star ratings for VC were significantly higher when compared to OM and VM. VC reviews had the highest proportion of positive emotion words compared to OM and VM. Qualitative results for VC support the quantitative findings: favorable themes related to perceptions of value, effectiveness in alleviating symptoms, and minimal side effects. Additionally, despite some concerns related to cost for VC, reviewers would use the medication again. Other qualitative findings support BV medical education campaigns for patients and providers on BV treatment.
Conclusions:
Overall, people want a BV treatment that is easy to use, quickly alleviates symptoms and has minimal side effects. Patients use product reviews to inform their decision-making about BV treatment, ask and seek answers to health-related questions, and share their experiences.
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.