CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 160Health Literacy and Information AccessibilityPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareInformation Retrieval and Search Behavior

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The effect of Dr Google on doctor–patient encounters in primary care: a quantitative, observational, cross-sectional study

Open access
Van Riel, Noor, Auwerx, Koen, Debbaut, Pieterjan, Van Hees, Sanne, Schoenmakers, Birgitte·2017·BJGP Open
DOI 10.3399/bjgpopen17x100833PMC PMC6169945
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Two-thirds of all patients search the internet prior to a health consultation. AIM: To explore how searching for online health information before visiting a doctor influences patients' behaviour during the consultation. DESIGN & SETTING: A quantitative, observational, and cross-sectional study of 18-75-year-old patients who used the internet. METHOD: Patients were recruited by social media for the quantitative study. This was followed by a qualitiative study of GPs who were questioned in focus groups. Two questions were addressed: What is the effect of searching online health information on the behaviour of the patients? How does the GP handle this information? RESULTS: = 963) usually went to the doctor after the online information search but two-thirds were not reassured by the internet search. More than half of responders had more confidence in their GP after searching online. The older the responders, the more they went to the doctor after their internet search and the younger the responders, the more they were worried. The more frequently people consulted the internet for specific complaints, the more likely they reported reassurance. DISCUSSION: Patients usually made an appointment with their GP after the internet search. New symptoms are rarely noticed and the search usually did not lead patients to distrust their GP. The majority of GPs described positive effects of the online search behaviour on the consultation. CONCLUSION: The emerging use of the internet for searching health information, commonly referred to as 'Dr Google', is not seen as a threat by GPs and leads to a better mutual understanding of symptoms and diagnosis.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3399/bjgpopen17x100833

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 22 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–160 of 160

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Van Riel, N., Auwerx, K., Debbaut, P., Van Hees, S., & Schoenmakers, B.
Affiliations
KU Leuven (BE)
Corresponding author
Schoenmakers, Birgitte
ORCID
Schoenmakers, Birgitte
Venue
BJGP Open
Publisher
Royal College of General Practitioners
Published
2017-05-16
Volume
1
Issue
2
Pages
bjgpopen17X100833
ISSN
2398-3795 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3399/bjgpopen17x100833
PMC
PMC6169945
OpenAlex
W2616270221
Cited by
159
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1
FWCI
11.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • BJGP Open (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
Keywords
online health information seeking, doctor-patient consultation, primary care, patient behavior, general practitioners, patient reassurance, GP attitudes

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review