"Online doctor discovery and reviews" by Keith Pascal (TopTierMD) Chicago Health 2.0
Keith Pascal, Co-Founder
May 26, 2010
who are we?
HEALTHCARE INFORMATION START-UP
EXPERT ADVICE AND INSIGHTS FROM THE BEST DOCTORS AS
DETERMINED BY THEIR PEERS
LAUNCHED 2009. PROFITABLE.
FOUNDERS: KEITH PASCAL & DAVID PRESKILL
“everybody’s doing it”….
A RECENT PEW INTERNET STUDY
the breadth of the market and the pace at which it’s growing:
Over 80% of American adults with Internet access go online for health information
47% of internet users have looked online for information on a doctor
24% of these “e-patients” have consulted rankings or reviews online of doctors or other providers.
60% say the information found online affected a decision about how to treat an illness or condition
53% say it led them to ask a doctor new questions, or to get a second opinion from another doctor.
38% say it affected a decision about whether to see a doctor.
IF YOU’RE A DOCTOR, IT’S GOOD TO KNOW THAT INTERNET USERS ARE
55% of consumers are seeking information about a certain medical treatment or procedure.
85% plan to visit a doctor or hospital within a month
DOCTORS HIGHLY COVET THEM
NYTimes data cites that of Internet seekers viewing doctor proﬁles:
78% between 25-64 years of age
Above average income and highly educated
...yet there are no available measuring sticks for
NO CREDIBLE RESOURCES AVAILABLE FOR DETERMINING THE BEST DOCTORS
No hall of fame. No academy awards
LACK OF TRANSPARENCY ON PERFORMANCE
AVAILABLE RESOURCES OFFER LITTLE VALUE IN DOCTOR SELECTION
Yelp.com Healthgrades.com Vitals.com
DEARTH OF QUALIFIED “EXPERT” INFORMATION
Internet is a mile wide and an inch deep….Yet consumers can still drown in it.
Lack of Transparency
consumers don’t yet understand of “good” vs. “best”
FERTILITY SUCCESS RATES (IVF) IN TREATABLE COLON CANCER - TEN YR
ILLINOIS FOR WOMEN <30 SURVIVAL RATES
56% at best clinics. 10% at worst clinics 63% percent for the best surgeons. 20% for the worst.
RECURRENCE AFTER HERNIA SURGERY
1 in 10 for worst performers. 1 in 20 for average performers.
RISK ADJUSTED DEATH RATES FOR
1 in 500 for best performers HEART BYPASS PATIENTS IN NYC
vary from ﬁve per cent to under one per cent
LIFE EXPECTANCY WITH CYSTIC
National average is 33 years. At the best centers it’s 47
Hospital brands still hold weight today despite the onset of “free agency”
available internet content is of limited use and reliability
DOCTOR BACKGROUND REPORTS ARE OF LIMITED VALUE
Aggregated data. Doctor CV’s. No Performance Information
PHYSICIAN RATING SITES OFFER LITTLE INSIGHT INTO DOCTOR SKILLS IN EVENT
OF A SERIOUS NEED
Patients unqualiﬁed to assess doctor skills. Nice if you want to know about their “service”.
Studies show relatively low usage
Examples: Healthgrades.com, Vitals.com, UCompareHealthCare.com
HOSPITAL WEBSITES ARE BROCHURE-WARE
Exercises in branding. Offers limited insights
Examples: U of C, Northwestern, Mayo Clinic, Harvard Medical
NO “FILTERS” AVAILABLE IN A GOOGLE SEARCH
No brand leaders or SEO leaders (except in case of consumer oriented procedures)
COMMUNITY SITES ARE ONE EXCEPTION
Find a Doctor
Licensed News Products
Other Licensed Content
Vitals.com, Yelp, Angie’s List
Find a Doctor
Original News Stories That
Patients Like Me
Others with similar issues
Gathering / Sharing meaningful
What is available today?
we believe that only way to identify the best doctors is
by gaining unbiased insight from other doctors
“best” doctor Community
Patient Rating Content Sites Peer Review
Castle Connolly WebMD PatientsLikeMe TopTierMD,
(aka Top Doctors); EverydayHealth Thebump Checkbook.org
Doctor Directory ✓ .
Doctor Selection ✓ .
Expert Content ✓ .
Reference / News ✓ . ✓ . ✓ .
• Strong user • Transparent
• Thorough connection and Selection;
• Depth of Content trust
Collection of Credibility;
Strength Doctors Relationships • Strong Website • Exchange of
• Doctor Support
• Hospital Support
• Loyalty • Hospital Support
• Limited Value • Selection
Beyond “Who” Process Lacks • Not necessarily a
“What” “Where” Transparency • Content Lacks • Labor and time
intensive to scale
• Poor Support • Poor Credibility
from Doctors w/ Doctors
Credible Vetting of
Doctors and Content
Weak SEM Strong SEM
Weak Vetting of