[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
May 17, 1976


Author Affiliations

Grant Hospital of Chicago Chicago

JAMA. 1976;235(20):2190. doi:10.1001/jama.1976.03260460014006

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


To the Editor.—  I read the article by Dr Brewer entitled "Guidelines for Recertification" (235:725, 1976) with a sense of scientific indignation.

  1. Nobody has ever established that reexamination by any method has any correlation with quality of patient care.

  2. There is also significant question as to whether routine postgraduate study to obtain a certain number of "points" has any value in this regard.

  3. The logistics for routine postgraduate education are mind-boggling when one considers the cost involved in physician time and expenses for a few hundred thousand doctors.

  4. One can seriously question who should be the examiner and the examinee when physicians of considerable experience are involved.

  5. It would seem that a medical audit system for physicians in hospital practice would determine the presence or absence of quality patient care when physicians are judged by their peers of departmental committees. This could be done in