Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • Other Publications
    • abfm

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
American Board of Family Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • abfm
American Board of Family Medicine

American Board of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • JABFM on Bluesky
  • JABFM On Facebook
  • JABFM On Twitter
  • JABFM On YouTube
Research ArticleSpecial Communication

A Primary Care Panel Size of 2500 Is neither Accurate nor Reasonable

Melanie Raffoul, Miranda Moore, Doug Kamerow and Andrew Bazemore
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine July 2016, 29 (4) 496-499; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2016.04.150317
Melanie Raffoul
From the Robert Graham Center, Washington, DC.
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Miranda Moore
From the Robert Graham Center, Washington, DC.
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Doug Kamerow
From the Robert Graham Center, Washington, DC.
MD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Andrew Bazemore
From the Robert Graham Center, Washington, DC.
MD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Primary care panel sizes are an important component of primary care practices. Determining the appropriate panel size has implications for patient access, physician workload, and care comprehensiveness and will have an impact on quality of care. An often quoted standard panel size is 2500. However, this number seems to arise in the literature anecdotally, without a basis in research. Subsequently, multiple studies observed that a panel size of 2500 is not feasible because of time constraints and results in incomplete preventive care and health care screening services. In this article we review the origins of a panel size of 2500, review the subsequent work examining this number and effectively debunking it as a feasible panel size, and discuss the importance of primary care physicians setting an appropriate panel size.

  • Comprehensive Health Care
  • Primary Care Physicians
  • Primary Health Care
  • Research
  • Workload
View Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of the American Board of Family     Medicine: 29 (4)
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
Vol. 29, Issue 4
July-August 2016
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Board of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to 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.
A Primary Care Panel Size of 2500 Is neither Accurate nor Reasonable
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Board of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Board of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
6 + 6 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
A Primary Care Panel Size of 2500 Is neither Accurate nor Reasonable
Melanie Raffoul, Miranda Moore, Doug Kamerow, Andrew Bazemore
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Jul 2016, 29 (4) 496-499; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2016.04.150317

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
A Primary Care Panel Size of 2500 Is neither Accurate nor Reasonable
Melanie Raffoul, Miranda Moore, Doug Kamerow, Andrew Bazemore
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Jul 2016, 29 (4) 496-499; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2016.04.150317
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Is a Primary Care Panel Size of 2500 Patients Reasonable?
    • What Is the Average Panel Size for a PCP?
    • What Factors Should PCPs Consider When Calculating a Reasonable Panel Size?
    • Why Is Primary Care Panel Size Important?
    • Conclusion
    • Notes
    • References
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Are Direct Primary Care Practices Located in Health Professional Shortage Areas?
  • A Few Doctors Will See Some of You: The Critical Role of Underrepresented in Medicine (URiM) Family Physicians in the Care of Medicaid Beneficiaries
  • How An Academic Direct Primary Care Clinic Served Patients from Vulnerable Communities
  • Time for Family Medicine to Stop Enabling a Dysfunctional Health Care System
  • Perceived quality of care among households ever enrolled in a community-based health insurance scheme in two districts of northeast Ethiopia: a community-based, cross-sectional study
  • Revitalizing Primary Care, Part 1: Root Causes of Primary Cares Problems
  • Perceived quality of care among households ever enrolled in a community-based health insurance scheme in two districts of northeast Ethiopia: a multilevel analysis
  • Supporting Community-Based Family Medicine Residency Training Programs in North Carolina and their Potential Impact on Healthy NC 2030
  • Encounters with Rheumatologists in a Publicly Funded Canadian Healthcare System: A Population-based Study
  • A Model of Enhanced Primary Care for Patients with Severe Mental Illness
  • Content Usage and the Most Frequently Read Articles of 2016
  • Research in Family Medicine by Family Physicians for the Practice of Family Medicine
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • In Defense of Generalists: Primary Care Observations Have Systematic Advantages
  • Looking Back to Move Forward: Reflections of PBRN Directors
  • Building a Primary Care Research Agenda for Latino Populations in the Setting of the Latino Paradox: A Report from the 2023 Latino Primary Care Summit
Show more Special Communication

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Comprehensive Health Care
  • Primary Care Physicians
  • Primary Health Care
  • Research
  • Workload

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Authors & Reviewers

  • Info For Authors
  • Info For Reviewers
  • Submit A Manuscript/Review

Other Services

  • Get Email Alerts
  • Classifieds
  • Reprints and Permissions

Other Resources

  • Forms
  • Contact Us
  • ABFM News

© 2025 American Board of Family Medicine

Powered by HighWire