BARBARA BATES, M.D., F.A.C.P.; RALPH C. PARKER JR., M.D., F.A.C.P.; CLIFFORD B. REIFLER, M.D., M.P.H.
Multiphasic screening has been suggested as one method of controlling access to the medical care system. The suggestion was probably based on the assumption that screening can identify most of the problems that would be found by the physician. Our study was designed to compare the apparent problems identified by screening with those found on clinical evaluation. Forty-seven persons seeking employment were examined independently by both methods. Only 17% of the conditions were identified in common by both screening and clinical evaluation. Twenty-six percent of the conditions were found by clinical evaluation alone and 57% by screening alone. The study was replicated in a small group of clinic patients, with similar results. The two methods of patient evaluation appear to supplement each other rather than substitute for each other.
Learn more about subscription options.
Register Now for a free account.
BATES B, PARKER RC, REIFLER CB. Clinical Evaluation and Multiphasic Screening: A Comparison of Yields. Ann Intern Med. 1971;75:929–931. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-75-6-929
Download citation file:
Published: Ann Intern Med. 1971;75(6):929-931.
Results provided by:
Copyright © 2017 American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.
Print ISSN: 0003-4819 | Online ISSN: 1539-3704
Conditions of Use
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only