The DOI matches its Crossref record; 91 of the 91 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Dropping the Baton: Specialty Referrals in the United States
Open accessAbstract
CONTEXT: In the United States, more than a third of patients are referred to a specialist each year, and specialist visits constitute more than half of outpatient visits. Despite the frequency of referrals and the importance of the specialty-referral process, the process itself has been a long-standing source of frustration among both primary care physicians (PCPs) and specialists. These frustrations, along with a desire to lower costs, have led to numerous strategies to improve the specialty-referral process, such as using gatekeepers and referral guidelines. METHODS: This article reviews the literature on the specialty-referral process in order to better understand what is known about current problems with the referral process and what solutions have been proposed. The article first provides a conceptual framework and then reviews prior literature on the referral decision, care coordination including information transfer, and access to specialty care. FINDINGS: PCPs vary in their threshold for referring a patient, which results in both the underuse and the overuse of specialists. Many referrals do not include a transfer of information, either to or from the specialist; and when they do, it often contains insufficient data for medical decision making. Care across the primary-specialty interface is poorly integrated; PCPs often do not know whether a patient actually went to the specialist, or what the specialist recommended. PCPs and specialists also frequently disagree on the specialist's role during the referral episode (e.g., single consultation or continuing co-management). CONCLUSIONS: There are breakdowns and inefficiencies in all components of the specialty-referral process. Despite many promising mechanisms to improve the referral process, rigorous evaluations of these improvements are needed.
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
Continuity of care: a multidisciplinary review
Haggerty, J. L., Reid, R. J., Freeman, G. K., Starfield, B. H., Adair, C. E., & McKendry, R. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7425.1219 · Cited by 2,374
Fung, C. H., Lim, Y.-W., Mattke, S., Damberg, C., & Shekelle, P. G. (2008) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-148-2-200801150-00006 · Cited by 980
Coordinating Care — A Perilous Journey through the Health Care System
Bodenheimer, T. (2008) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmhpr0706165 · Cited by 968
Missed and delayed diagnoses in the ambulatory setting: a study of closed malpractice claims
Gandhi, T. K., Kachalia, A., Thomas, E. J., Puopolo, A. L., Yoon, C., Brennan, T. A., & Studdert, D. M. (2006) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-145-7-200610030-00006 · Cited by 662
Advanced Access: Reducing Waiting and Delays in Primary Care
Murray, M., & Berwick, D. M. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.289.8.1035 · Cited by 616
Greenfield, S. (1992) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.267.12.1624 · Cited by 524
Balancing the strengths of systematic and narrative reviews
Collins, J. A., & Fauser, B. C. J. M. (2005) · Human Reproduction Update · doi:10.1093/humupd/dmh058 · Cited by 510
Schoen, C., Osborn, R., How, S. K. H., Doty, M. M., & Peugh, J. (2008) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.28.1.w1 · Cited by 432
Interventions to improve outpatient referrals from primary care to secondary care
Akbari, A., Mayhew, A., Al-Alawi, M. A., Grimshaw, J., Winkens, R., Glidewell, E., Pritchard, C., Thomas, R., & Fraser, C. (2008) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd005471.pub2 · Cited by 402
Communication breakdown in the outpatient referral process
Gandhi, T. K., Sittig, D. F., Franklin, M., Sussman, A. J., Fairchild, D. G., & Bates, D. W. (2000) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1046/j.1525-1497.2000.91119.x · Cited by 371
Cited by
Proportion Of Antidepressants Prescribed Without A Psychiatric Diagnosis Is Growing
Mojtabai, R., & Olfson, M. (2011) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2010.1024 · Cited by 256
Tripathi, R., Knusel, K. D., Ezaldein, H. H., Scott, J. F., & Bordeaux, J. S. (2018) · JAMA Dermatology · doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2018.3114 · Cited by 158
Olayiwola, J. N., Anderson, D., Jepeal, N., Aseltine, R., Pickett, C., Yan, J., & Zlateva, I. (2016) · The Annals of Family Medicine · doi:10.1370/afm.1869 · Cited by 117
Barnett, M. L., Yee, H. F., Mehrotra, A., & Giboney, P. (2017) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2016.1283 · Cited by 115
Self-citationPrimary Care Practitioners’ Perceptions of Electronic Consult Systems: A Qualitative Analysis
Lee, M. S., Ray, K. N., Mehrotra, A., Giboney, P., Yee, H. F., & Barnett, M. L. (2018) · JAMA Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.0738 · Cited by 86
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- MEHROTRA, A., FORREST, C. B., & LIN, C. Y.
- Venue
- Milbank Quarterly
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-03
- Volume
- 89
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 39-68
- ISSN
- 0887-378X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2112038757
- Cited by
- 373
- References
- 91
- FWCI
- 20.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Dropping the Baton: Specialty Referrals in the United States. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2011.00619.x
- The paper
- MEHROTRA, A., FORREST, C. B., & LIN, C. Y. (2011). Dropping the Baton: Specialty Referrals in the United States. Milbank Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2011.00619.x
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.