↓ Skip to main content

Seeking a second medical opinion: composition, reasons and perceived outcomes in Israel

Overview of attention for article published in Israel Journal of Health Policy Research, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Seeking a second medical opinion: composition, reasons and perceived outcomes in Israel
Published in
Israel Journal of Health Policy Research, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13584-017-0191-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Liora Shmueli, Nadav Davidovitch, Joseph S. Pliskin, Ran D. Balicer, Igal Hekselman, Geva Greenfield

Abstract

Seeking a second-opinion (SO) is a common clinical practice that can optimize treatment and reduce unnecessary procedures and risks. We aim to characterize the composition of the population of SO seekers, their reasons for seeking a SO and choosing a specific physician, and their perceived outcomes following the SO. A cross-sectional national telephone survey, using a representative sample of the general Israeli population (n = 848, response rate = 62%). SO utilization was defined as seeking an additional clinical opinion from a specialist within the same specialty, for the same medical concern. We describe the characteristics of respondents who obtained SOs, their reasons for doing so and their perceived outcomes: (1) Satisfaction with the SO; (2) Experiencing health improvement after receiving a SO; (3) A difference in the diagnosis or treatment suggested in the first opinions and the second opinions; (4) Preference of the SO over the first one. Most of the respondents who sought a SO (n = 344) were above 60 years old, secular, living with a partner, perceived their income to be above average and their health status to be not so good. For the patients who utilized SOs, orthopedic surgeons were sought out more than any other medical professional.Reasons for seeking a SO included doubts about diagnosis or treatment (38%), search for a sub-specialty expert (19%) and dissatisfaction with communication (19%). SO seekers most frequently chose a specific specialist based on a recommendation from a friend or a relative (33%). About half of the SO seekers also searched for information on the internet. Most of the respondents who sought a SO mentioned that they were satisfied with it (84%), felt health improvement (77%), mentioned that there was a difference between the diagnosis or treatment between the first opinion and the SO (56%) and preferred the SO over the first one (91%). Clinical uncertainty or dissatisfaction with patient-physician communication were the main reasons for seeking a SO. Policy makers should be aware that many patients choose a physician for a SO based on recommendations made outside the medical system. We recommend creating mechanisms that help patients in the complicated process of seeking a SO, suggest specialists who are suitable for the specific medical problem of the patient, and provide tools to reconcile discrepant opinions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 17%
Student > Master 5 14%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 10 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Psychology 2 6%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 12 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 December 2017.
All research outputs
#10,875,494
of 12,271,192 outputs
Outputs from Israel Journal of Health Policy Research
#216
of 304 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#285,238
of 344,142 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Israel Journal of Health Policy Research
#17
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,271,192 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 304 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,142 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.