scholarly journals Author’s Response to Peer Reviews of “COVID-19 Vaccination and Daily Cases, Hospitalizations, and Death Rates in Tennessee, United States: Case Study” (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Roghani
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Death Rates ◽  
Peer Reviews

UNSTRUCTURED These are author responses to peer review.

scholarly journals The Validity of Online Patient Ratings of Physicians: Analysis of Physician Peer Reviews and Patient Ratings (Preprint)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J McGrath ◽  
Jennifer Lewis Priestley ◽  
Yiyun Zhou ◽  
Patrick J Culligan
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Family Medicine ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
The United States ◽  
Medical Specialization ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Selection Of

BACKGROUND Information from ratings sites are increasingly informing patient decisions related to health care and the selection of physicians. OBJECTIVE The current study sought to determine the validity of online patient ratings of physicians through comparison with physician peer review. METHODS We extracted 223,715 reviews of 41,104 physicians from 10 of the largest cities in the United States, including 1142 physicians listed as “America’s Top Doctors” through physician peer review. Differences in mean online patient ratings were tested for physicians who were listed and those who were not. RESULTS Overall, no differences were found between the online patient ratings based upon physician peer review status. However, statistical differences were found for four specialties (family medicine, allergists, internal medicine, and pediatrics), with online patient ratings significantly higher for those physicians listed as a peer-reviewed “Top Doctor” versus those who were not. CONCLUSIONS The results of this large-scale study indicate that while online patient ratings are consistent with physician peer review for four nonsurgical, primarily in-office specializations, patient ratings were not consistent with physician peer review for specializations like anesthesiology. This result indicates that the validity of patient ratings varies by medical specialization.

scholarly journals Authors’ Response to Peer Reviews of “Social Media Polarization and Echo Chambers in the Context of COVID-19: Case Study” (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie Jiang ◽  
Xiang Ren ◽  
Emilio Ferrara
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Echo Chambers

UNSTRUCTURED These are author responses to peer review.

Gendered differences in emigration and mobility perspectives among European researchers working abroad

2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elisabeth Scheibelhofer
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Research Strategy ◽  
The Future ◽  
Highly Skilled

This paper focuses on gendered mobilities of highly skilled researchers working abroad. It is based on an empirical qualitative study that explored the mobility aspirations of Austrian scientists who were working in the United States at the time they were interviewed. Supported by a case study, the paper demonstrates how a qualitative research strategy including graphic drawings sketched by the interviewed persons can help us gain a better understanding of the gendered importance of social relations for the future mobility aspirations of scientists working abroad.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document