Spine Surgeon Selection Criteria: Factors Influencing Patient Choice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: A prospective questionnaire. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate factors that patients consider when selecting a spine surgeon. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The rise in consumer-driven health insurance plans has increased the role of patients in provider selection. The purpose of this study is to identify factors that may influence a patient's criteria for selecting a spine surgeon. METHODS: Two hundred thirty-one patients who sought treatment by one spine surgeon completed an anonymous questionnaire consisting of 26 questions. Four questions regarded demographic information; 16 questions asked respondents to rate the importance of specific criteria regarding spine surgeon selection (scale 1-10, with 10 being the most important); and six questions were multiple-choice regarding patient preferences toward aspects of their surgeon (age, training background, etc.). RESULTS: Patients rated board certification (9.26 ± 1.67), in-network provider status (8.10 ± 3.04), and friendliness/bedside manner (8.01 ± 2.35) highest among factors considered when selecting a spine surgeon. Most patients (92%) reported that 30 minutes or less should pass between check-in and seeing their surgeon during a clinic appointment. Regarding whether their spine surgeon underwent training as a neurosurgeon versus an orthopedic surgeon, 25% reported no preference, 52% preferred neurosurgical training, and 23% preferred orthopedic training. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that board certification and in-network health insurance plans may be most important in patients' criteria for choosing a spine surgeon. Advertisements were rated least important by patients. Patients expressed varying preferences regarding ideal surgeon age, training background, proximity, medical student/resident involvement, and clinic appointment availability. The surgeon from whom patients sought treatment completed an orthopedic surgery residency; hence, it is notable that 52% of patients preferred a spine surgeon with a neurosurgical background. In the context of patients' increasing role in health care decision-making and provider selection, understanding the factors that influence patients' selection of a spine surgeon is important. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".