![]() ![]() ![]() This might also allow practitioners more freedom to respond to reviews without compromising patient identity. ![]() should offer reviewers additional protections when sharing personal information, particularly by allowing them to post anonymously without linking to their regular profiles. (In fact, I wrote about this very issue of the lack of reliability of health 2.0 websites ratings and reviews four years ago.) Such data has virtually no scientific validity - it’s no better than asking a stranger on the street. Really popular doctors or therapists in large urban areas have more. Most have only one or two reviews of a health care professional. This is not the case with these dozens of healthcare provider review websites. There are only two primary websites for travel reviews - TripAdvisory and Yelp - meaning you’re more likely to get a large amount of reviews on any given restaurant or hotel. What makes one patient upset enough to write a bad review might not bother - in fact, might even help - another.Īnother huge problem is that, right now, there are dozens of websites you can go to review a therapist or healthcare professional. Something that works for one patient at a particular point in therapy might not work for him later, when his needs change. A certain treatment might help one person but not another. But unless a therapist regularly falls asleep during sessions, patients’ experiences in psychotherapy are more subjective. If you wait an hour for an appetizer, chances are that other diners will have a similarly bad experience. Of course, no one wants to be the subject of a bad review, but psychotherapy services are special. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |