Search engines are only vast databases, allow them to search, not necessarily choose for you
Till a few years ago, search for a doctor was based on human intelligence, largely derived from personal experiences. These days many patients find their doctor on the internet. This is progress. One would imagine that unlike information based on personal experiences, information derived from the internet would not only be rapidly available but also unbiased and true. That may not necessarily be the case.
Patients usually type two criteria in the search bar while looking for a particular specialist: “nearest to me” and “best”. While it is easy for the internet to find a doctor in a particular geographical area (that’s its job), what I find intriguing is how a search engine identifies “the best” doctor”? What are the criteria used by it? How does it factor in the non-measurable human qualities required of a medical professional such as empathy, judgement or communication skills? Does it know whether a doctor possesses the requisite training or skill set required to perform a particular surgery or intervention?
Out of sheer curiosity and a pinch of existential anxiety, I searched the internet about the searcher. How does a search engine decide that one doctor is better than another? Here’s what I discovered, and I must warn you, the answer is less about philosophical revelation and more about supermarket economics.
Search engines don’t really know who the best doctor is. They don’t attend medical conferences, they don’t scrub in for procedures, and they certainly don’t take rounds. What they do know very well is how to identify websites that are search-engine-optimised (I have no clue how this is achieved), profiles that are frequently clicked (whether spontaneously or coercively in anyone’s’ guess) and shockingly pages that are promoted through paid services. Yes, paid services. Much like how the “best” detergent or the “leading” brand of instant noodles magically becomes your destiny because an advertisement told you so, the best doctor may float to the top of your search not because of surgical finesse but because a marketing intern successfully burned through their digital budget.
So essentially, when you are searching for the best doctor, the rating is supported either by reviews or by payments. Both, as you may imagine, are imperfect substitutes for actual medical judgment.
The next philosophical puzzle - who writes reviews?I can say with some confidence (and a touch of amusement) that humans are wonderfully predictable when reviewing services. First, our expectations are sky-high. We expect the appointment to be on time, the hospital to be serene, the billing counter to be fast and efficient and the doctor to look deeply concerned yet magically available at all hours.
When reality fails to match this elaborate fantasy, we can be ruthlessly critical about even the smallest deviation.
We also tend to write about unhappy experiences far more easily than pleasant ones. This is not specific to medicine; it is simply who we are as a species. We are far more linguistically gifted when furious than when grateful.
Finally, while writing reviews, we often follow the all-or-none principle. We either award a glorious five stars or an unforgiving single star. Nuance is not the favourite child of online rating systems. Yet, just like humans, every medical setup has strengths and weaknesses, and in our criticism of the weaknesses, we often overlook the strengths.
Even the most flowery and grammatically correct reviews must be taken with a pinch of salt. Also, beware of services which have been reviewed by different customers in exactly the same language. These reviews are likely to be tutored.How then to choose the best (hopefully wisest) doctor?There is perhaps no ideal way to identify the best doctor. The practice of medicine has too many non- quantifiable human aspects which are impossible to measure. An internet based search can, at most be a good starting point. If we ask the right questions of it, we will hopefully get better answers.
I can suggest a few additional parameters that might help us in making the right choice. Educational background and experience: while academic degrees alone are not the only gold standard of a doctor’s worth, generally a doctor who has trained at reputed institutions and worked in busy hospitals is likely to be worth his salt. Training shapes judgment, and judgment shapes outcomes.Personal patient experiences: real conversations and not anonymous online reviews. If someone has been treated for a problem similar to yours and recommends a doctor, that recommendation often carries more weight than any algorithmic badge of honour. Patients who have survived disease rarely inflate their narratives.Direct questioning and personal interaction: nothing replaces a direct conversation. Ask the doctor about their experience with your specific condition, their outcomes, their approach, their concerns. The clarity in their responses and the comfort you feel while listening can often guide you more accurately than any glossy rating ever will. Trust is rarely born out of search results; it is shaped across a table, in honest dialogue.Only when we look in the right place, in the right way, and for the right reasons, can we ever hope to find a doctor who is truly the best for us - not according to the internet, but according to our needs, our illness and our faith.Finally, it will be good to remember that the next time you review a doctor, remember that it concerns a professional service in a very critical area of our lives. It is not a popularity contest maintained by algorithms. Your honesty might make a world of difference to another patient. Behind every rating and review, there stands a real patient and a real doctor, both working towards the best outcomes. Sometimes, in this noisy digital world, this simple truth can get lost.
Prof Hemant Madan is an Interventional Cardiologist and Programme Head, Cardiac Sciences for Narayana Health. profhemantmadan@gmail
