The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Dealing With Medical Practice Variations: A Proposal for Action
Abstract
Prologue: Without much attention from the profession and virtually no public fanfare, John Wennberg has been tracking the phenomenon of variations in the use of medical care for more than a decade. Wennberg, who ranks among the leaders of the nations tiny cadre of medical care epidemiologists, has been driven by the notion that practice variations were important to identify and understand because they suggest a misuse of care. Wennberg trained at Johns Hopkins University in internal medicine and also holds a master's degree in public health from that institution. Currently, he is a professor in the Department of Community and Family Medicine at Dartmouth Medical School From 1974 to 1979, he served on the faculty of the Harvard Medical School, attached to the Department of Preventive and Social Medicine. During his research pursuits, Wennberg has uncovered systematic and persistent differences in the standardized rates of use for common surgical procedures and other medical services in the United States. But this phenomenon is not limited to any particular health care delivery system. Such variations have been found wherever Wennberg and his colleagues have looked, be it New England, Iowa, the United Kingdom, or Norway, as well as among the political subdivisions within these areas. Wennberg believes that the principal reason for the dramatic variations in use of medical care can be found in what he characterizes as the “practice style factor.” Wennberg s conclusion has particular relevance to Medicares new hospital payment approach based on diagnosis-related groups (DRGs). Built into this approach to cost containment is an assumption that the mix of hospitalized patients is largely unaffected by physician practice styles. But, as he has found, professional discretion is a very important variable and must be taken into consideration in dealing with the health cost conundrum.
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
Cited by
Where Is the Evidence? A Systematic Review of Shared Decision Making and Patient Outcomes
Shay, L. A., & Lafata, J. E. (2015) · Medical Decision Making · doi:10.1177/0272989x14551638 · Cited by 1,214
Generalisability in economic evaluation studies in healthcare: a review and case studies
Sculpher, M., Pang, F., Manca, A., Drummond, M., Golder, S., Urdahl, H., Davies, L., & Eastwood, A. (2004) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta8490 · Cited by 441
Miller, M., Azrael, D., & Barber, C. (2012) · Annual Review of Public Health · doi:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031811-124636 · Cited by 265
Tanenbaum, S. J. (1993) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199310213291713 · Cited by 243
Matthews, A., Herrett, E., Gasparrini, A., Van Staa, T., Goldacre, B., Smeeth, L., & Bhaskaran, K. (2016) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.i3283 · Cited by 221
Metadata
- Authors
- Wennberg, J. E.
- Venue
- Health Affairs
- Publisher
- Health Affairs Publishing, LLC
- Published
- 1984-01
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 6-33
- ISSN
- 0278-2715 (ISSN-L)
- 1544-5208
- OpenAlex
- W2089371778
- Cited by
- 712
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 78.41
- 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: Dealing With Medical Practice Variations: A Proposal for Action. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1377/hlthaff.3.2.6
- The paper
- Wennberg, J. E. (1984). Dealing With Medical Practice Variations: A Proposal for Action. Health Affairs. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.3.2.6
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.