Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • BJGP Life
    • eLetters
    • Librarian information
    • Alerts
    • Resilience
    • Video
    • Audio
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
    • RCGP e-Portfolio

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Advertisement
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
    • RCGP e-Portfolio
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
Advertisement
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • BJGP Life
    • eLetters
    • Librarian information
    • Alerts
    • Resilience
    • Video
    • Audio
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Research Article

Comparing the quality of referrals of general practitioners with high and average referral rates: an independent panel review.

J A Knottnerus, J Joosten and J Daams
British Journal of General Practice 1990; 40 (334): 178-181.
J A Knottnerus
Department of General Practice, University of Limburg, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J Joosten
Department of General Practice, University of Limburg, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J Daams
Department of General Practice, University of Limburg, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

The quality of referrals of four general practitioners, two with high and two with average rates of referral to the department of internal medicine, was judged by an independent expert panel. The panel, consisting of two general practitioners and one specialist, reviewed a set of information about the referrals blindly and in random sequence. The same distribution of quality of referrals was found among the referrals of the two high referring general practitioners (n = 192) as among those of the general practitioners with average rates (n = 88); that is, 57% and 55% respectively, of the cases had clear medical indications for referral, while the data did not permit a conclusion in 15% and 10%, respectively, of the cases. Controlling for sex, age and status of the referral (first or repeat referral) did not alter the results. We conclude that using referral rates to judge referral quality is misleading. However, a blind and randomly performed panel review of referrals is a time consuming but feasible method of quality assessment.

Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 40 (334)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 40, Issue 334
May 1990
  • Table of Contents
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Advertising (PDF)
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Comparing the quality of referrals of general practitioners with high and average referral rates: an independent panel review.
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Comparing the quality of referrals of general practitioners with high and average referral rates: an independent panel review.
J A Knottnerus, J Joosten, J Daams
British Journal of General Practice 1990; 40 (334): 178-181.

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Comparing the quality of referrals of general practitioners with high and average referral rates: an independent panel review.
J A Knottnerus, J Joosten, J Daams
British Journal of General Practice 1990; 40 (334): 178-181.
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Improving the ascertainment of families at high risk of colorectal cancer: a prospective GP register study.
  • Exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial of shared care development for long-term mental illness.
  • Integrated primary mental health care: threat or opportunity in the new NHS?
Show more Research Article

Related Articles

Cited By...

Advertisement

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers
  • RCGP e-Portfolio

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7679
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2021 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242