These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

38 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37457044)

  • 21. A Quantitative Analysis of Online Plastic Surgeon Reviews for Abdominoplasty.
    Qiu CS; Hockney SM; Turin SY; Dorfman RG; Kim JYS
    Plast Reconstr Surg; 2019 Mar; 143(3):734-742. PubMed ID: 30817644
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. How do physician demographics, training, social media usage, online presence, and wait times influence online physician review scores for spine surgeons?
    Donnally CJ; McCormick JR; Li DJ; Maguire JA; Barker GP; Rush AJ; Wang MY
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2019 Feb; 30(2):279-288. PubMed ID: 30497169
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Online Patient Ratings Are Not Correlated with Total Knee Replacement Surgeon-Specific Outcomes.
    Trehan SK; Nguyen JT; Marx R; Cross MB; Pan TJ; Daluiski A; Lyman S
    HSS J; 2018 Jul; 14(2):177-180. PubMed ID: 29983660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Online physician review websites poorly correlate to a validated metric of patient satisfaction.
    Chen J; Presson A; Zhang C; Ray D; Finlayson S; Glasgow R
    J Surg Res; 2018 Jul; 227():1-6. PubMed ID: 29804840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Rating a Sports Medicine Surgeon's "Quality" in the Modern Era: an Analysis of Popular Physician Online Rating Websites.
    Nwachukwu BU; Adjei J; Trehan SK; Chang B; Amoo-Achampong K; Nguyen JT; Taylor SA; McCormick F; Ranawat AS
    HSS J; 2016 Oct; 12(3):272-277. PubMed ID: 27703422
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Patient Satisfaction Reporting and Its Implications for Patient Care.
    Mehta SJ
    AMA J Ethics; 2015 Jul; 17(7):616-21. PubMed ID: 26158808
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Public awareness, perception, and use of online physician rating sites.
    Hanauer DA; Zheng K; Singer DC; Gebremariam A; Davis MM
    JAMA; 2014 Feb; 311(7):734-5. PubMed ID: 24549555
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Consumerism in health care: challenges and opportunities.
    Zeckhauser R; Sommers B
    Virtual Mentor; 2013 Nov; 15(11):988-92. PubMed ID: 24257093
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. A changing landscape of physician quality reporting: analysis of patients' online ratings of their physicians over a 5-year period.
    Gao GG; McCullough JS; Agarwal R; Jha AK
    J Med Internet Res; 2012 Feb; 14(1):e38. PubMed ID: 22366336
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. What patients say about their doctors online: a qualitative content analysis.
    López A; Detz A; Ratanawongsa N; Sarkar U
    J Gen Intern Med; 2012 Jun; 27(6):685-92. PubMed ID: 22215270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Public reporting in Germany: the content of physician rating websites.
    Emmert M; Sander U; Esslinger AS; Maryschok M; Schöffski O
    Methods Inf Med; 2012; 51(2):112-20. PubMed ID: 22101427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Analysis of 4999 online physician ratings indicates that most patients give physicians a favorable rating.
    Kadry B; Chu LF; Kadry B; Gammas D; Macario A
    J Med Internet Res; 2011 Nov; 13(4):e95. PubMed ID: 22088924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Patients' evaluations of health care providers in the era of social networking: an analysis of physician-rating websites.
    Lagu T; Hannon NS; Rothberg MB; Lindenauer PK
    J Gen Intern Med; 2010 Sep; 25(9):942-6. PubMed ID: 20464523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Quality monitoring of physicians: linking patients' experiences of care to clinical quality and outcomes.
    Sequist TD; Schneider EC; Anastario M; Odigie EG; Marshall R; Rogers WH; Safran DG
    J Gen Intern Med; 2008 Nov; 23(11):1784-90. PubMed ID: 18752026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Physician-Review Websites in Orthopaedic Surgery.
    Bernstein DN; Mesfin A
    JBJS Rev; 2020 Mar; 8(3):e0158. PubMed ID: 32224636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. [Volume and health outcomes: evidence from systematic reviews and from evaluation of Italian hospital data].
    Amato L; Colais P; Davoli M; Ferroni E; Fusco D; Minozzi S; Moirano F; Sciattella P; Vecchi S; Ventura M; Perucci CA
    Epidemiol Prev; 2013; 37(2-3 Suppl 2):1-100. PubMed ID: 23851286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Chronic Pain Practices: An Evaluation of Positive and Negative Online Patient Reviews.
    Orhurhu MS; Salisu B; Sottosanti E; Abimbola N; Urits I; Jones M; Viswanath O; Kaye AD; Simopoulos T; Orhurhu V
    Pain Physician; 2019 Sep; 22(5):E477-E486. PubMed ID: 31561660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. What Makes a 5-Star Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Surgeon? An Analysis of Positive Online Patient Reviews.
    Noel ME; Kuttner NP; Lebaron Z; Richman EH; Tummala S; Brinkman JC; Chhabra A
    Orthop J Sports Med; 2023 Jul; 11(7):23259671231181378. PubMed ID: 37457044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]     [New Search]
    of 2.