The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparing Generalist and Specialty Care: Discrepancies, Deficiencies, and Excesses
Abstract
Policymakers, managed care organizations, medical educators, and the general public are showing an increasing interest in the amount and quality of care provided by generalists and subspecialists. This article reviews studies comparing the knowledge base of and quality of care provided by these 2 groups of physicians. English-language articles were identified through MEDLINE (1966-present) using the following keywords: generalist, generalism, (sub)specialist, (sub)specialty, (sub)specialization, consultation, referral, and quality of care, and through the bibliographies of these citations. All studies were evaluated. With respect to quality of care, only American studies were chosen. Data quality was assessed by me. Evidence is strongest that the knowledge base and quality of care provided by specialists exceeds those of generalists for certain conditions such as myocardial infarction, depression, and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. Differences in many other areas are multifactorial, and often a function of study design or patient selection. The differences, however, are not as striking or important to the health of the public at large as those deficiencies in disease management, preventive care, and health maintenance that are common to all physicians. Furthermore, overuse of diagnostic and therapeutic modalities by certain specialists leads to increased costs with either no benefit or added risks to patients. The quality and coordination of care provided by generalists and specialists may be improved through changes in education and training, via quality improvement methods of providing patient care, and by increasing visit length and optimizing use of referrals and strategies for generalist-specialist comanagement. Further study of these areas is warranted and should concentrate on outcomes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Jr, G. (1986) · doi:10.1001/archinte.1986.00360130079012 · Cited by 237
Cited by
Contribution of Primary Care to Health Systems and Health
STARFIELD, B., SHI, L., & MACINKO, J. (2005) · The Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0009.2005.00409.x · Cited by 5,507
Chronic Illness Management: What Is the Role of Primary Care?
Rothman, A. A., & Wagner, E. H. (2003) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-138-3-200302040-00034 · Cited by 566
Katon, W., Von Korff, M., Lin, E., & Simon, G. (2001) · General Hospital Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s0163-8343(01)00136-0 · Cited by 313
Underuse of Prevention and Lifestyle Counseling in Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease
Berger, J. S., & Ladapo, J. A. (2017) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2017.02.064 · Cited by 183
“Because quality of care can be dependent by physician type (19), we sought to investigate medication use and lifestyle counseling by practicing physician.”
BackgroundEffects of a website designed to improve the management of migraines.
Sciamanna, C. N., Nicholson, R. A., Lofland, J. H., Manocchia, M., Mui, S., & Hartman, C. W. (2006) · Headache The Journal of Head and Face Pain · doi:10.1111/j.1526-4610.2006.00312.x · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Donohoe, M. T.
- Venue
- Archives of Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1998-08-10
- Volume
- 158
- Issue
- 15
- Pages
- 1596
- ISSN
- 0003-9926 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2136370715
- Cited by
- 193
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 38.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.