Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Formative Research
Date Submitted: Jun 21, 2025
Date Accepted: Mar 5, 2026
Coverage, Traits and Geographic Distribution of Online Surgeon Reviews: Large-Scale Cross-Sectional Analysis of Surgeon Representation on Online Rating Platforms in the United States
ABSTRACT
Background:
The use of online physician rating platforms has significantly increased and has been shown to influence physician selection. There is limited data on the utilization of these platforms for rating surgeons.
Objective:
In this study, we sought to assess the geographic distribution and patterns in rating scores of surgeons in the US. Additionally, we examined rating volumes across different surgical specialties, and association between peer-nominated and patient-initiated ratings on online rating platforms in the United States.
Methods:
We conducted a cross-sectional study by identifying 201,154 US surgeons via the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System (NPPES) and Doctors and Clinicians (DAC) downloadable files. We assessed surgeon coverage on three online rating platforms and their geographic usage patterns. We described the rating scores and volumes across different surgical specialties and assessed the relationship of rating platforms by comparing peer-nominated and patient-initiated online ratings.
Results:
A total of 158,630 surgeons (78.86%) had ratings on at least one of the three patient-initiated websites across 11 specialties. Plastic surgeons, neurosurgeons, and orthopedic surgeons had the highest mean number of patient-initiated ratings. Surgeons with “Top Doctor” recognition from peers (n = 23,171, 11.52%) were associated with an increased median patient-initiated rating (Rating Platform A: 4.36 vs. 4.20, p < 0.001; Platform B: 4.30 vs. 4.20, p < 0.001; Rating Platform C: 4.20 vs. 3.80, p < 0.001). Geographic analysis indicated that 91% of the US population lived in a county with a surgeon rated ≥10 times.
Conclusions:
Both patient-initiated and peer-nominated rating platforms have a comprehensive coverage of surgeons in the United States, but this coverage differs significantly between surgical specialties. Further work should assess how publicly available online ratings drive surgeon selection and their association with patient experience and post-operative outcomes.
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.