Cargando…

Physicians’ attitudes towards the media and peer-review selection of the ‘best cancer doctor’: comparison of two different selection methods

OBJECTIVES: The choice of doctor is an important issue for patients with cancer, and the reputation of the doctor is the single most important factor for patients to choose a doctor. Media are providing information about the ‘best cancer doctor’, but they vary widely in their selection methodology....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shin, Dong Wook, Cho, Juhee, Yang, Hyung Kook, Kim, So Young, Lee, Soohyeon, Nam, Eun Joo, Chung, Joo Seop, Im, Jeong-Soo, Park, Keeho, Park, Jong Hyock
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5961570/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29764870
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019067
_version_ 1783324737913487360
author Shin, Dong Wook
Cho, Juhee
Yang, Hyung Kook
Kim, So Young
Lee, Soohyeon
Nam, Eun Joo
Chung, Joo Seop
Im, Jeong-Soo
Park, Keeho
Park, Jong Hyock
author_facet Shin, Dong Wook
Cho, Juhee
Yang, Hyung Kook
Kim, So Young
Lee, Soohyeon
Nam, Eun Joo
Chung, Joo Seop
Im, Jeong-Soo
Park, Keeho
Park, Jong Hyock
author_sort Shin, Dong Wook
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: The choice of doctor is an important issue for patients with cancer, and the reputation of the doctor is the single most important factor for patients to choose a doctor. Media are providing information about the ‘best cancer doctor’, but they vary widely in their selection methodology. We investigated cancer physicians’ attitudes towards the selection of the ‘best cancer doctor’ by the media, by comparing two different selection methodologies: selection by media personnel or selection through peer-review system. DESIGN: Nationwide, cross-sectional survey. SETTING: National Cancer Center and 12 Regional Cancer Centers across Korea. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 680 cancer care physicians participated in the survey (75.5% participation rate), and two were excluded due to incomplete response. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Physicians’ opinions on the credibility, fairness, validity, helpfulness to patients, their intention to use the information and helpfulness to improve the quality of cancer care of the two different methods. RESULTS: Only a few physicians believed that the selection method of the ‘best cancer doctor’ by the media personnel was credible (9.1%), fair (6.1%) or valid (10.0%). In contrast, the majority agreed that the peer-selection method of the ‘best doctor’ is credible (74.7%), fair (64.7%) and valid (67.4%). More physicians believed the latter methods would be useful for patients when selecting their doctor (38.5% vs 82.2%) and may lead to improvement of the quality of cancer care from the perspective of the healthcare system (12.6% vs 59.8%). The need for ensuring objectiveness and transparency was also raised. CONCLUSION: Physicians showed different attitudes towards two different selection methods. Regulations or guidelines for selecting the ‘best cancer doctor’ and for disclosing the information should be considered in order to control the quality of the information and to protect the customers.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5961570
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59615702018-05-30 Physicians’ attitudes towards the media and peer-review selection of the ‘best cancer doctor’: comparison of two different selection methods Shin, Dong Wook Cho, Juhee Yang, Hyung Kook Kim, So Young Lee, Soohyeon Nam, Eun Joo Chung, Joo Seop Im, Jeong-Soo Park, Keeho Park, Jong Hyock BMJ Open Research Methods OBJECTIVES: The choice of doctor is an important issue for patients with cancer, and the reputation of the doctor is the single most important factor for patients to choose a doctor. Media are providing information about the ‘best cancer doctor’, but they vary widely in their selection methodology. We investigated cancer physicians’ attitudes towards the selection of the ‘best cancer doctor’ by the media, by comparing two different selection methodologies: selection by media personnel or selection through peer-review system. DESIGN: Nationwide, cross-sectional survey. SETTING: National Cancer Center and 12 Regional Cancer Centers across Korea. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 680 cancer care physicians participated in the survey (75.5% participation rate), and two were excluded due to incomplete response. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Physicians’ opinions on the credibility, fairness, validity, helpfulness to patients, their intention to use the information and helpfulness to improve the quality of cancer care of the two different methods. RESULTS: Only a few physicians believed that the selection method of the ‘best cancer doctor’ by the media personnel was credible (9.1%), fair (6.1%) or valid (10.0%). In contrast, the majority agreed that the peer-selection method of the ‘best doctor’ is credible (74.7%), fair (64.7%) and valid (67.4%). More physicians believed the latter methods would be useful for patients when selecting their doctor (38.5% vs 82.2%) and may lead to improvement of the quality of cancer care from the perspective of the healthcare system (12.6% vs 59.8%). The need for ensuring objectiveness and transparency was also raised. CONCLUSION: Physicians showed different attitudes towards two different selection methods. Regulations or guidelines for selecting the ‘best cancer doctor’ and for disclosing the information should be considered in order to control the quality of the information and to protect the customers. BMJ Publishing Group 2018-05-14 /pmc/articles/PMC5961570/ /pubmed/29764870 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019067 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Research Methods
Shin, Dong Wook
Cho, Juhee
Yang, Hyung Kook
Kim, So Young
Lee, Soohyeon
Nam, Eun Joo
Chung, Joo Seop
Im, Jeong-Soo
Park, Keeho
Park, Jong Hyock
Physicians’ attitudes towards the media and peer-review selection of the ‘best cancer doctor’: comparison of two different selection methods
title Physicians’ attitudes towards the media and peer-review selection of the ‘best cancer doctor’: comparison of two different selection methods
title_full Physicians’ attitudes towards the media and peer-review selection of the ‘best cancer doctor’: comparison of two different selection methods
title_fullStr Physicians’ attitudes towards the media and peer-review selection of the ‘best cancer doctor’: comparison of two different selection methods
title_full_unstemmed Physicians’ attitudes towards the media and peer-review selection of the ‘best cancer doctor’: comparison of two different selection methods
title_short Physicians’ attitudes towards the media and peer-review selection of the ‘best cancer doctor’: comparison of two different selection methods
title_sort physicians’ attitudes towards the media and peer-review selection of the ‘best cancer doctor’: comparison of two different selection methods
topic Research Methods
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5961570/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29764870
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019067
work_keys_str_mv AT shindongwook physiciansattitudestowardsthemediaandpeerreviewselectionofthebestcancerdoctorcomparisonoftwodifferentselectionmethods
AT chojuhee physiciansattitudestowardsthemediaandpeerreviewselectionofthebestcancerdoctorcomparisonoftwodifferentselectionmethods
AT yanghyungkook physiciansattitudestowardsthemediaandpeerreviewselectionofthebestcancerdoctorcomparisonoftwodifferentselectionmethods
AT kimsoyoung physiciansattitudestowardsthemediaandpeerreviewselectionofthebestcancerdoctorcomparisonoftwodifferentselectionmethods
AT leesoohyeon physiciansattitudestowardsthemediaandpeerreviewselectionofthebestcancerdoctorcomparisonoftwodifferentselectionmethods
AT nameunjoo physiciansattitudestowardsthemediaandpeerreviewselectionofthebestcancerdoctorcomparisonoftwodifferentselectionmethods
AT chungjooseop physiciansattitudestowardsthemediaandpeerreviewselectionofthebestcancerdoctorcomparisonoftwodifferentselectionmethods
AT imjeongsoo physiciansattitudestowardsthemediaandpeerreviewselectionofthebestcancerdoctorcomparisonoftwodifferentselectionmethods
AT parkkeeho physiciansattitudestowardsthemediaandpeerreviewselectionofthebestcancerdoctorcomparisonoftwodifferentselectionmethods
AT parkjonghyock physiciansattitudestowardsthemediaandpeerreviewselectionofthebestcancerdoctorcomparisonoftwodifferentselectionmethods