Plumb
C+

Doctor & hospital ratings

Healthgrades

RVO Health (Red Ventures + Optum/UnitedHealth Group joint venture)

Directory / lead-gen Free to read Visit Healthgrades ↗

Rigorous hospital data next to doctor pages where the top slots are paid ads.

What it's really for Solid hospital ratings from Medicare data, attached to a doctor directory where the top slots are paid ads.

What our grade covers The grade on this page is about its hospital quality star ratings and doctor-finder listings, not everything the site does.

High Scoring Confidence Checked against primary sources. We are confident in the facts and the grade here.

Follow the money

The parties it ranks pay it the most: hospitals and physicians buy advertising, Sponsored/Featured listings that appear above organic results, premium profiles (~$199/mo for an MD), and lead-gen at roughly $100 per booked appointment, while highly-rated hospitals separately license Healthgrades' award badges and trademarks for marketing — so the entities being rated well are exactly the ones funding the platform, even though Healthgrades says paid participation does not change the core algorithmic search ranking.

Source →
Operating since
1998 (28 years) · source
What it costs you
Free to read The reviews are free to read.
How they make money
It makes money by selling advertising, "Featured"/Sponsored listings, premium provider profiles, lead-generation (per-call/per-appointment) packages, and award-badge licensing to the doctors and hospitals it rates.
What they do
It publishes algorithmic hospital quality star ratings derived from Medicare claims data alongside a consumer doctor-finder directory with patient star reviews.
What to watch for
A normal user won't easily tell the difference between the rigorous claims-based hospital ratings and the doctor pages, where top placements can be paid "Featured" ads, patient reviews are self-attested (you just check a box saying you were a patient), and many providers actively solicit the reviews you see.
Composite score
2.80 / 5.00 → grade C+

How the grade was reached

Independence · 30% weight 2 / 5

Does the site take money from the very entities it ranks? Pay-for-placement, vendor-funded data, and affiliate commissions all pull this down. The less the ranking can be bought, the higher the score.

Evidence basis · 30% weight 3 / 5

What is the ranking actually built on? Hands-on testing scores highest, then verified first-hand reviews, then opinion or popularity surveys and self-reported figures, then pay-to-rank, which scores lowest.

Method transparency · 20% weight 4 / 5

Is the methodology published, specific, and reproducible? Can a reader see how a given rank was reached, or is it a black box?

Conflict disclosure · 10% weight 3 / 5

Are commercial relationships, sponsorships, and affiliate arrangements disclosed clearly and near the rankings themselves, rather than buried?

Manipulation resistance · 10% weight 2 / 5

How hard is it to game? Controls against fake reviews, solicited reviews, and vendor gaming raise this; an open box anyone can stuff lowers it.

Evidence

Compare with others

Others reviewing professional services (compare all →)

← Back to the Report Card