The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Failure of Physicians To Recognize Functional Disability in Ambulatory Patients
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the ability of internists to identify functional disabilities reported by their patients. DESIGN: Comparison of responses by physicians and a random sample of their patients to a 12-item questionnaire about physical and social function. SETTING: A hospital-based internal medicine group practice in Boston, Massachusetts, and selected office-based internal medicine practices in Los Angeles, California. SUBJECTS: Five staff physicians, three general internal medicine fellows, and 34 internal medicine residents in the hospital-based practice and 178 of their patients. Seventy-six physicians in the office-based practices and 230 of their patients. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Physicians underestimated or failed to recognize 66% of disabilities reported by patients. Patient-reported disabilities were underestimated or unrecognized more often in the hospital-based practice than in the office-based practices (75% compared with 60%, P less than 0.05). Physicians overstated functional impairment in 21% of paired responses in which patients reported no disability. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians often underestimate or fail to recognize functional disabilities that are reported by their patients. They overstate functional impairment to a lesser degree. Because these discrepancies may adversely affect patient care and well-being, medical educators and clinicians should pay more attention to the assessment of patient function.
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
MCHORNEY, C. A., JOHNE, W., & ANASTASIAE, R. (1993) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-199303000-00006 · Cited by 6,681
Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate?
McHorney, C. A., & Tarlov, A. R. (1995) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/bf01593882 · Cited by 2,206
Transitions between frailty states among community-living older persons
Gill, T. M., Gahbauer, E. A., Allore, H. G., & Han, L. (2006) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.166.4.418 · Cited by 1,141
Rumsfeld, J. S., Alexander, K. P., Goff, D. C., Graham, M. M., Ho, P. M., Masoudi, F. A., Moser, D. K., Roger, V. L., Slaughter, M. S., Smolderen, K. G., et al. (2013) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0b013e3182949a2e · Cited by 540
Diabetes, Major Depression, and Functional Disability Among U.S. Adults
Egede, L. E. (2004) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/diacare.27.2.421 · Cited by 422
Metadata
- Authors
- Calkins, D. R., Rubenstein, L. V., Cleary, P. D., Davies, A. R., Jette, A. M., Fink, A., Kosecoff, J., Young, R. T., Brook, R. H., & Delbanco, T. L.
- Venue
- Annals of Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American College of Physicians
- Published
- 1991-03-15
- Volume
- 114
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 451-454
- ISSN
- 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-3704
- OpenAlex
- W1989298714
- Cited by
- 305
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 39.02
- 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: Failure of Physicians To Recognize Functional Disability in Ambulatory Patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7326/0003-4819-114-6-451
- The paper
- Calkins, D. R., Rubenstein, L. V., Cleary, P. D., Davies, A. R., Jette, A. M., Fink, A., Kosecoff, J., Young, R. T., Brook, R. H., & Delbanco, T. L. (1991). Failure of Physicians To Recognize Functional Disability in Ambulatory Patients. Annals of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-114-6-451
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.