Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,234

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Do Practice Guidelines Guide Practice?

Lomas, Jonathan, Anderson, Geoffrey M., Domnick-Pierre, Karin, Vayda, Eugene, Enkin, Murray W., Hannah, Walter J.·1989·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

Guidelines for medical practice can contribute to improved care only if they succeed in moving actual practice closer to the behaviors the guidelines recommend. To assess the effect of such guidelines, we surveyed hospitals and obstetricians in Ontario before and after the release of a widely distributed and nationally endorsed consensus statement recommending decreases in the use of cesarean sections. These surveys, along with discharge data from hospitals reflecting actual practice, revealed that most obstetricians (87 to 94 percent) were aware of the guidelines and that most (82.5 to 85 percent) agreed with them. Attitudes toward the use of cesarean section were congruent with the recommendations even before their release. One third of the hospitals and obstetricians reported changing their practice as a consequence of the guidelines, and obstetricians reported rates of cesarean section in women with a previous cesarean section that were significantly reduced, in keeping with the recommendations (from 72.2 percent to 61.1 percent; P less than 0.01). The surveys also showed, however, that knowledge of the content of the recommendations was poor (67 percent correct responses). Furthermore, data on actual practice after the publication of the guidelines showed that the rates of cesarean section were 15 to 49 percent higher than the rates reported by obstetricians, and they showed only a slight change from the previous upward trend. We conclude that guidelines for practice may predispose physicians to consider changing their behavior, but that unless there are other incentives or the removal of disincentives, guidelines may be unlikely to effect rapid change in actual practice. We believe that incentives should operate at the local level, although they may include system-wide economic changes.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm198911093211906

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 1,234

Metadata

Authors
Lomas, J., Anderson, G. M., Domnick-Pierre, K., Vayda, E., Enkin, M. W., & Hannah, W. J.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1989-11-09
Volume
321
Issue
19
Pages
1306-1311
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2312807852
Cited by
1,234
References
0
FWCI
57.49
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Do Practice Guidelines Guide Practice? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm198911093211906
The paper
Lomas, J., Anderson, G. M., Domnick-Pierre, K., Vayda, E., Enkin, M. W., & Hannah, W. J. (1989). Do Practice Guidelines Guide Practice? New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm198911093211906

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.