Natural Language Processing of Sentiments Identified in Patient Comments Associated with Less Than Top-Rated Care.

Ali Azarpey, Jacob Thomas, David Ring, Orrin Franko
Author Information
  1. Ali Azarpey: Department of Surgery and Perioperative Care, Dell Medical School, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA. ORCID
  2. Jacob Thomas: Department of Surgery and Perioperative Care, Dell Medical School, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.
  3. David Ring: Department of Surgery and Perioperative Care, Dell Medical School, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA. ORCID
  4. Orrin Franko: East Bay Hand Medical Center, San Leandro, CA, USA.

Abstract

Natural language processing (NLP) analysis of patient comments about their care can inform improvement initiatives. We used NLP to quantify sentiments and identify topics in patient comments associated with submaximal ratings of experience. Using a set of 1117 patient comments associated with ratings 1-4 out of 5 from a commercial source, we analyzed associated sentiments measured by Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count software and associated themes using topic modeling. In the sentiment analysis, positive sentiments were associated with better numerical ratings while word count, numbers, ethnicity, and negative tones were associated with lower ratings. Topics of "listening, concern, and collaboration" were associated with 1-star ratings and "logistics" and "pain" with 4-star ratings. The finding that NLP analysis of comments from submaximal patient ratings of experience is consistent with evidence that the worst ratings are associated with relationship issues and more moderate ratings are associated with process issues affirms the ability of NLP to analyze large amounts of patient comments to identify opportunities to improve patient experience of care.

Keywords

References

  1. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2023 Apr 15;31(8):397-404 [PMID: 36727955]
  2. Int J Med Inform. 2019 May;125:37-46 [PMID: 30914179]
  3. J Pediatr Orthop. 2022 May-Jun 01;42(5):e533-e537 [PMID: 35200216]
  4. Spine J. 2019 Jan;19(1):182-185 [PMID: 30077043]
  5. Pain Physician. 2019 Sep;22(5):E477-E486 [PMID: 31561660]
  6. Ann Vasc Surg. 2023 Jan;88:249-255 [PMID: 36028181]
  7. Int J Med Inform. 2017 Sep;105:110-120 [PMID: 28750904]
  8. Qual Manag Health Care. 2022 Oct-Dec 01;31(4):210-218 [PMID: 35383720]
  9. J Neurosurg Spine. 2021 Dec 10;36(5):869-875 [PMID: 34891133]
  10. J Patient Exp. 2022 Feb 8;9:23743735221079144 [PMID: 35155757]
  11. Adv Ther. 2018 Mar;35(3):424-437 [PMID: 29450863]
  12. Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil. 2021 Aug 18;3(5):e1465-e1472 [PMID: 34746847]
  13. Drug Saf. 2016 Mar;39(3):241-50 [PMID: 26715498]
  14. JAMA. 2014 Feb 19;311(7):734-5 [PMID: 24549555]
  15. J Biomed Inform. 2015 Dec;58:268-279 [PMID: 26518315]
  16. Health Econ. 2020 Aug;29(8):913-922 [PMID: 32515116]
  17. J Arthroplasty. 2020 Jun;35(6S):S364-S367 [PMID: 31818501]
  18. J Res Pers. 2008 Feb;42(1):96-132 [PMID: 18802499]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0associatedratingspatientNLPanalysiscommentsexperiencesentimentsNaturallanguageprocessingcareidentifysubmaximaltopicsentimentissuescaninformimprovementinitiativesusedquantifytopicsUsingset11171-45commercialsourceanalyzedmeasuredLinguisticInquiryWordCountsoftwarethemesusingmodelingpositivebetternumericalwordcountnumbersethnicitynegativetoneslowerTopics"listeningconcerncollaboration"1-star"logistics""pain"4-starfindingconsistentevidenceworstrelationshipmoderateprocessaffirmsabilityanalyzelargeamountsopportunitiesimproveLanguageProcessingSentimentsIdentifiedPatientCommentsAssociatedLessTop-RatedCarenaturalreview

Similar Articles

Cited By

No available data.