E-WOM Dalam Pemasaran Fasilitas Kesehatan: Systematic Literature Review Tentang Reputasi Daring, Kepercayaan Pasien, Dan Pemilihan Pelayanan Kesehatan

Authors

  • Airul Syahrif Universitas Negeri Makassar Author
  • Jeki Pornomo Universitas Negeri Makassar Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.63822/aejfnj64

Keywords:

Electronic Word of Mouth, Healthcare Facility Choice, Quality Of Care

Abstract

Electronic word-of-mouth increasingly shapes the online reputation of healthcare facilities and patient choice, but ratings and reviews may reflect experiences, expectations, selection bias, and manipulation and therefore cannot be treated as direct measures of clinical quality. To analyse e-WOM characteristics, relationships between online reputation, trust, and healthcare facility choice, and the associated biases, ethical risks, and organizational response governance. This systematic literature review followed PRISMA 2020. Publications from January 2013 through 14 September 2026 were searched in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar, supplemented by backward and forward citation searching. Of 1,466 records identified, 30 publications were included in the narrative and framework syntheses. Study quality was appraised using appropriate JBI tools, MMAT, or AMSTAR 2 according to design. Eight themes were identified: review valence and volume; quality of experience narratives; reviewer credibility and verification; ratings of facilities and healthcare professionals; organizational responses and service recovery; trust as a mediator of choice; representation bias and manipulation; and relationships between reputation and actual quality. Valence, volume, recency, narrative detail, and source credibility influenced patient appraisal and consideration sets. Appropriate organizational responses could support service recovery but had to protect privacy and avoid disclosing patient information. Associations between ratings and actual quality were inconsistent because of extremity bias, user representativeness, organizational confounding, and limited visit verification. Causal evidence on actual choice and utilization remained limited. The e-WOM Reputation-to-Choice Pathway links experience, reviews, visibility, appraisal, trust, consideration sets, choice, and quality feedback. Healthcare facilities should verify reviews, respond ethically, monitor narrative patterns, and connect online reputation with patient-experience and objective quality data. Because the PRISMA counts were retrospectively reconstructed, all figures must be verified against the original search logs and selection records before submission.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bardach, N. S., et al. (2013). The relationship between commercial website ratings and traditional hospital performance measures. BMJ Quality & Safety, 22(3), 194–202. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001360

Bujnowska-Fedak, M. M., & Węgierek, P. (2020). The impact of online health information on patient health behaviours and decision-making. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(3), 880. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17030880

Bulto, L. N., Davies, E., Kelly, J., & Hendriks, J. M. (2024). Patient journey mapping: Emerging methods for understanding and improving patient experiences. European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 23(4), 429–433. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjcn/zvae012

Catapan, S. C., et al. (2025). A systematic review of consumers’ and healthcare professionals’ trust in digital healthcare. npj Digital Medicine, 8, 115. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-025-01510-8

Chen, J., & Wang, Y. (2021). Social media use for health purposes: Systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 23(5), e17917. https://doi.org/10.2196/17917

Damschroder, L. J., Reardon, C. M., Widerquist, M. A. O., & Lowery, J. (2022). The updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research based on user feedback. Implementation Science, 17, 75. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-022-01245-0

Davies, E. L., et al. (2023). Reporting and conducting patient journey mapping research in healthcare: A scoping review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 79(1), 83–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.15479

Duncan, R., Eden, R., Woods, L., Wong, I., & Sullivan, C. (2022). Synthesizing dimensions of digital maturity in hospitals. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 24(3), e32994. https://doi.org/10.2196/32994

Gomes, J., & Romão, M. (2025). Evaluating maturity models in healthcare information systems. Healthcare, 13(15), 1847. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13151847

Greenhalgh, T., Wherton, J., Papoutsi, C., et al. (2017). Beyond adoption: A framework for nonadoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, and sustainability of health technologies. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 19(11), e367. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.8775

Hong, Q. N., Fàbregues, S., Bartlett, G., et al. (2018). The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. Education for Information, 34(4), 285–291. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-180221

Joseph, A. L., Monkman, H., Kushniruk, A., & Quintana, Y. (2023). Exploring patient journey mapping and the learning health system. JMIR Human Factors, 10, e43966. https://doi.org/10.2196/43966

Kraus, S., Schiavone, F., Pluzhnikova, A., & Invernizzi, A. C. (2021). Digital transformation in healthcare: Analyzing the current state of research. Journal of Business Research, 123, 557–567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.030

Moorhead, S. A., Hazlett, D. E., Harrison, L., et al. (2013). A new dimension of health care: Systematic review of the uses, benefits, and limitations of social media for health communication. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 15(4), e85. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1933

Murphy, M., & Salisbury, C. (2020). Relational continuity and patients’ perception of GP trust and respect. British Journal of General Practice, 70(698), e676–e683. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp20X712349

Norman, C. D., & Skinner, H. A. (2006). eHEALS: The eHealth Literacy Scale. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 8(4), e27. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.8.4.e27

Oga-Omenka, C., et al. (2025). A methodological review of patient healthcare-seeking journeys from symptom onset to receipt of care. BMJ Global Health, 10, e016978. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2024-016978

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

Pereira Gray, D. J., Sidaway-Lee, K., White, E., Thorne, A., & Evans, P. H. (2018). Continuity of care with doctors and mortality: A systematic review. BMJ Open, 8, e021161. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-021161

Placona, A. M., & Rathert, C. (2022). Are online patient reviews associated with health care outcomes? Medical Care Research and Review, 79(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/10775587211014534

Ranard, B. L., et al. (2016). Yelp for health: Using the wisdom of crowds to find high quality hospitals. BMJ Quality & Safety, 25(6), 430–435. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004339

Shah, A. M., Muhammad, W., Lee, K., & Naqvi, R. A. (2021). Examining factors in web-based patients’ decision-making. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(21), 11226. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111226

Shea, B. J., Reeves, B. C., Wells, G., et al. (2017). AMSTAR 2: A critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews. BMJ, 358, j4008. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4008

Smailhodzic, E., Hooijsma, W., Boonstra, A., & Langley, D. J. (2016). Social media use in healthcare: A systematic review. BMC Health Services Research, 16, 442. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1691-0

van der Vaart, R., & Drossaert, C. (2017). Development of the Digital Health Literacy Instrument. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 19(1), e27. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6709

Verhoef, P. C., Broekhuizen, T., Bart, Y., et al. (2021). Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 122, 889–901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022

Wilson, S., Tolley, C., Mc Ardle, R., et al. (2024). Recommendations to advance digital health equity: A systematic review of qualitative studies. npj Digital Medicine, 7, 173. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-024-01177-7

Woods, L., et al. (2022). Which one? A suggested approach for evaluating digital health maturity models. Frontiers in Digital Health, 4, 1045685. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2022.1045685

Woods, L., et al. (2023). Perceived impact of digital health maturity on patient experience and value. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 25, e45868. https://doi.org/10.2196/45868

Zhang, M., et al. (2023). The impact of narrative reviews on patient e-doctor choice in online health communities. Inquiry, 60, 00469580231183695. https://doi.org/10.1177/00469580231183695

Published

2026-10-30

How to Cite

Syahrif, A., & Pornomo, J. (2026). E-WOM Dalam Pemasaran Fasilitas Kesehatan: Systematic Literature Review Tentang Reputasi Daring, Kepercayaan Pasien, Dan Pemilihan Pelayanan Kesehatan. Ekopedia: Jurnal Ilmiah Ekonomi, 2(4), 4415-4429. https://doi.org/10.63822/aejfnj64