I appreciate your response and agree that this is dialogue worth having – and that Angie’s List is in no way at fault for providing scoring mechanisms extended toward consumers of any type of service. Just as I don’t blame doctors for not wanting to ‘opt in’, I don’t blame users for wanting detailed opinions related to others’ experiences. I will definitely check on upcoming changes to ratings of health care providers both as an analyst and as a user of your site. Which I recommend with 5 stars.

The most interesting dimension of reputation scoring is what constitutes ‘local knowledge’. I’ve moved 7 times in 7 years and now live somewhere I share with no family or friends. Thus, when banking or buying a car or fixing a leak, I can’t count on Mom or Dad or cousin so-and-so to tell me which provider is best. Thus far, Angie’s List has become a key strategic resource across 4 of those recent “home towns” and unfailingly has been accurate in delivering positive experiences with providers recommended by others. Angie’s List should host pot luck dinners in each location so I can meet the nice folks in person who’ve set me on the right path so often. Just don’t score my casserole.

Cheryl Reed here, from Angie’s List.

Thanks for opening the discussion on online health care ratings. At Angie’s List, we strongly believe that the more information consumers have, the better off they are – regardless of the service they’re seeking — and the better off service professionals (including those in the health care industry) are, too.

Consumer reviews are only part of the toolkit patients need to make the best health care decisions, and we link our members to independent, regulatory sites where clinical proficiency indicators can be found. But the overwhelming response from our members, and our 14 years of experience in consumer ratings, shows us that real consumer experiences and information sharing is of great value.

Most consumers don’t claim to be able to determine which heart surgeon will deliver the best outcome or which oncologist will best be able to manage an individual’s cancer, but they can tell you all about their experience with that physician. Did he communicate well? Were you comfortable? Was the billing process difficult? And finally, what was the outcome? While the answers to these questions may not directly address physician quality, they certainly impact the patient in ways that can affect the outcome of their treatment.

Another important distinction is the reliability of the information consumers can access. Data integrity is a key part of our service, and we’ve invested heavily to ensure our information is as accurate and reliable as possible. We constantly monitor for attempts to stack the deck for or against any professionals; we alert service professionals to report and encourage their response and active participation in the dialogue.

Consumers have more responsibility and direct control over their health care decisions today than in years past. They don’t just want information ahead of time: they deserve to be able to easily access it. As one member recently wrote: “Just because a doctor is a jerk doesn’t mean he isn’t a great oncologist, and when push comes to shove, I’ll take the healing powers over easy small talk… But it also doesn’t mean that I don’t want a head’s up before I go to the office that he’s a jerk.”

Our members grade their experience with professionals on an A-F scale (so we actually use 5 of the 26 letters) but also offer rich detail about their experience. That combination of grades and stories helps consumers know something about the professional before they walk into the office. Taken in context with other ratings mechanisms, consumers have more information today than they did even a year ago. Hopefully, they’ll have dramatically more information in the future.

At Angie’s List, we’re continually refining our service and will be enhancing the health care ratings very soon. We hope you’ll check on the changes and continue this important debate.