Download Free Electronic Document

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 1.5 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

This document provides a detailed methodological overview of the SelectMD 2.0 provider choice experiment. This study uses an experimental design to test different methods of incorporating patient comments along with Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Services (CAHPS) survey results, Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS)-like measures of effective clinical treatments, and indicators of patient safety in web-based physician quality reports. In addition, the study allowed for exploration of the role of patient navigators in affecting provider choice. The study aims to help the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) better understand how people choose a doctor as their regular source of medical care and advice.

Table of Contents

  • Chapter One

    Overview of the SelectMD 2.0 Experiment

  • Chapter Two

    Sample Description

  • Chapter Three

    SelectMD 2.0 Experimental Website

  • Chapter Four

    Pre- and Post-experiment Surveys

  • Appendix

    Pre and Post-Experiment Surveys

This research was conducted by RAND Health.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation Working paper series. RAND working papers are intended to share researchers' latest findings and to solicit informal peer review. They have been approved for circulation by RAND but may not have been formally edited or peer reviewed.

Permission is given to duplicate this electronic document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit the RAND Permissions page.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.