State Medical Boards, Licensure, and Discipline in the United States
Open accessAbstract
Medical practice acts and state medical boards have evolved since their conception in the mid-19th century. Today, state medical boards are usually responsible for a variety of functions, with the main function being the detection and discipline of unprofessional and unethical conduct by physicians and other medical professionals. In this article, a brief history of medical licensing and regulation is first provided, with an overview of the structure and process of state medical boards, and how they vary across states. Next, common causes for medical board complaints are discussed, with a focus on complaints against psychiatrists. Last, the author provides general medical-legal considerations that a psychiatrist should contemplate if he or she is the subject of a medical board complaint.
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
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Clinicians facing diagnostic errors, especially those leading to patient harm, may face malpractice claims and disciplinary measures from state medical boards.
“However, when faced with diagnostic errors, especially those leading to patient harm, clinicians may face malpractice claims, resulting in possible disciplinary measures from state medical boards [340], such as license suspension or revocation, probation, reprimands, fines, mandatory retraining, or practice restrictions [341].”
From Toward Safer Diagnoses: A SEIPS-Based Narrative Review of Diagnostic Errors (2026) · cites this paper as [341]
The “Disciplinary Actions of State Boards” section (p. 339) says malpractice actions require negligence and actual patient harm, and that boards may use malpractice charges or settlements as an alert to possible misconduct. It supports the possibility of both malpractice claims and board discipline, but does not specifically address diagnostic errors or say that a malpractice claim itself results in discipline. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 22
- Miles SH: A piece of my mind. A challenge to licensing boards: the stigma of mental illness. JAMA 1998; 280:865
- Morrison J, Wickersham P: Physicians disciplined by a state medical board. JAMA 1998; 279:1889-1893
- Cardarelli R, Licciardone JC, Ramirez G: Predicting risk for disci- plinary action by a state medical board. Tex Med 2004; 100:84-90
- Clay SW, Conatser RR: Characteristics of physicans disciplined by the State Medical Board of Ohio. J Am Osteopath Assoc 2003; 103: 81-88
- Kohatsu ND, Gould D, Ross LK, et al: Characteristics associated with physician discipline: a case-control study. Arch Intern Med 2004; 164:653-658
- Khaliq AA, Dimassi H, Huang CY, et al: Disciplinary action against physicians: who is likely to get disciplined? Am J Med 2005; 118: 773-777
- Cardarelli R, Licciardone JC: Factors associated with high-severity disciplinary action by a state medical board: a Texas study of medical license revocation. J Am Osteopath Assoc 2006; 106: 153-156
- Morrison J, Morrison T: Psychiatrists disciplined by a state med- ical board. Am J Psychiatry 2001; 158:474-478
- Shore JH: The impaired physician. Four years after probation. JAMA 1982; 248:3127-3130 Focus Vol. 17, No. 4, Fall 2019 focus.psychiatryonline.org 341
- Bissell L, Skorina JK: One hundred alcoholic women in medicine. An interview study. JAMA 1987; 257:2939-2944
- Gallegos KV, Lubin BH, Bowers C, et al: Relapse and recovery: five to ten year follow-up study of chemically dependent physicians-- the Georgia experience. Md Med J 1992; 41:315-319
- Talbott DG, Gallegos KV, Wilson PO, et al: The Medical Associa- tion of Georgia's Impaired Physicians Program. Review of the first 1000 physicians: analysis of specialty . JAMA 1987; 257:2927-2930
- Enbom JA, Thomas CD: Evaluation of sexual misconduct com- plaints: the Oregon Board of Medical Examiners, 1991 to 1995. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 176:1340-1346
- Dehlendorf CE, Wolfe SM: Physicians disciplined for sex-related offenses. JAMA 1998; 279:1883-1888
- Papadakis MA, Teherani A, Banach MA, et al: Disciplinary action by medical boards and prior behavior in medical school. N Engl J Med 2005; 353:2673-2682
- Sawicki NN: Character, competence and the principles of medical discipline. J Health Care Law Policy 2010; 13:285-323
- Jung P, Lurie P, Wolfe SM: U.S. physicians disciplined for criminal activity. Health Matrix 2006; 16:335-350
- Mcnary A: Licensing board complaints: what you need to know. Innov Clin Neurosci 2018; 15:47-49
- Harris JA, Byhoff E: Variations by state in physician disciplinary actions by US medical licensure boards. BMJ Qual Saf 2017; 26: 200-208
- Lillvis DF, McGrath RJ: Directing discipline: state medical board responsiveness to state legislatures. J Health Polit Policy Law 2017; 42:123-165
- Law MT, Hansen ZK: Medical licensing board characteristics and physician discipline: an empirical analysis. J Health Polit Policy Law 2010; 35:63-93
- Bourne T, Vanderhaegen J, Vranken R, et al: Doctors' experiences and their perception of the most stressful aspects of complaints processes in the UK: an analysis of qualitative survey data. BMJ Open 2016; 6:e011711
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Toward Safer Diagnoses: A SEIPS-Based Narrative Review of Diagnostic Errors
Yen, C., Epling, J. W., Rockwell, M., & Vaughn-Cooke, M. (2026) · Diagnostics · doi:10.3390/diagnostics16020347 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
- Authors
- Landess, J.
- Affiliations
- Mendota Mental Health Institute (US)
- Corresponding author
- Landess, Jacqueline
- Venue
- Focus
- Published
- 2019-10
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 337-342
- ISSN
- 1541-4094 (ISSN-L)
- 1541-4108
- OpenAlex
- W2987530173
- Cited by
- 16
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2
- FWCI
- 1.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- FOCUS The Journal of Lifelong Learning in Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Occupational and Professional Licensing Regulation
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Regulation
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health, Medicine and Society
- Keywords
- state medical boards, medical licensing, medical discipline, medical practice acts, history of medical regulation, psychiatrists, professional misconduct, physician ethics
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
