IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v25y1987i7p861-866.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The diagnostic process in primary care: A comparison of general internists and family physicians

Author

Listed:
  • Simpson, Deborah E.
  • Rich, Eugene C.
  • Dalgaard, Kathleen A.
  • Gjerdingen, Dwenda
  • Crowson, Terry W.
  • O'Brien, Daniel K.
  • Johnson, Paul E.

Abstract

This investigation examined the formulation of diagnostic hypotheses by general internists and family physicians in response to three patient cases (dyspnea, abdominal pain and syncope). The investigation was conducted in the United States. Physician responses to sequentially presented written clinical information were audiotaped. Each transcribed protocol was scored to enumerate and characterize the hypotheses considered by physicians in each specialty. Results of the analyses of variance of hypothesis measures revealed that internists generated more hypotheses than family physicians and that the internist's hypotheses were more specific and were less likely to be generated by other physicians. In addition, internists tended to consider hypotheses more closely related to the final diagnosis sooner in the case presentation than did family physicians. The findings of increased number, specificity, and uniqueness of hypothesis considered by internists are consistent with previously demonstrated differences in the amount and nature of diagnostic information collected by family physicians and internists.

Suggested Citation

  • Simpson, Deborah E. & Rich, Eugene C. & Dalgaard, Kathleen A. & Gjerdingen, Dwenda & Crowson, Terry W. & O'Brien, Daniel K. & Johnson, Paul E., 1987. "The diagnostic process in primary care: A comparison of general internists and family physicians," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 25(7), pages 861-866, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:25:y:1987:i:7:p:861-866
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(87)90044-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chilingerian, Jon A., 1995. "Evaluating physician efficiency in hospitals: A multivariate analysis of best practices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 548-574, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:25:y:1987:i:7:p:861-866. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.