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 ArticleOriginal Research

The Influence of Dermatologist and Primary Care Physician Visits on Melanoma Outcomes Among Medicare Beneficiaries

Richard G. Roetzheim, Ji-Hyun Lee, Jeanne M. Ferrante, Eduardo C. Gonzalez, Ren Chen, Kate J. Fisher, Kymia Love-Jackson and Ellen P. McCarthy
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine November 2013, 26 (6) 637-647; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2013.06.130042
Richard G. Roetzheim
From the Department of Family Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL (RGR, ECG, RC, KL-J); the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL (RGR, J-HL, KJF); the Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ (JMF); the Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Trenton, NJ (JMF); and the Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (EPM).
MD, MSPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ji-Hyun Lee
From the Department of Family Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL (RGR, ECG, RC, KL-J); the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL (RGR, J-HL, KJF); the Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ (JMF); the Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Trenton, NJ (JMF); and the Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (EPM).
RPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jeanne M. Ferrante
From the Department of Family Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL (RGR, ECG, RC, KL-J); the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL (RGR, J-HL, KJF); the Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ (JMF); the Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Trenton, NJ (JMF); and the Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (EPM).
MD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Eduardo C. Gonzalez
From the Department of Family Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL (RGR, ECG, RC, KL-J); the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL (RGR, J-HL, KJF); the Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ (JMF); the Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Trenton, NJ (JMF); and the Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (EPM).
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ren Chen
From the Department of Family Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL (RGR, ECG, RC, KL-J); the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL (RGR, J-HL, KJF); the Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ (JMF); the Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Trenton, NJ (JMF); and the Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (EPM).
MD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kate J. Fisher
From the Department of Family Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL (RGR, ECG, RC, KL-J); the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL (RGR, J-HL, KJF); the Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ (JMF); the Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Trenton, NJ (JMF); and the Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (EPM).
MA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kymia Love-Jackson
From the Department of Family Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL (RGR, ECG, RC, KL-J); the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL (RGR, J-HL, KJF); the Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ (JMF); the Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Trenton, NJ (JMF); and the Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (EPM).
MBA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ellen P. McCarthy
From the Department of Family Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL (RGR, ECG, RC, KL-J); the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL (RGR, J-HL, KJF); the Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ (JMF); the Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Trenton, NJ (JMF); and the Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (EPM).
PhD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    Figure 1.

    Melanoma-specific survival. PCP, primary care physician.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1. Characteristics of Study Subjects Diagnosed with Melanoma (n = 18,884)
    CharacteristicsPatients
    No.%
    Prior physician visits
        Neither PCP nor dermatologist2,41912.8
        PCP only9,55150.6
        Dermatologist only9945.3
        Both PCP and dermatologist5,92031.3
    Age at diagnosis (years)
        67–758,67645.9
        76–857,84741.6
        ≥862,36112.5
    Sex
        Male11,28359.7
        Female7,60140.3
    Race/ethnicity
        Non-Hispanic white17,86694.6
        Bon-Hispanic black1150.6
        Hispanic3081.6
        Asian/American Indian/Pacific Islander1100.6
        Other4852.6
    Marital status
        Single (never married)1,1296.0
        Married9,50050.3
        Separated/divorced6713.6
        Widowed3,64019.3
        Unknown3,94420.9
    MSA of residence
        Large metropolitan10,57056.0
        Metropolitan5,55229.4
        Urban1,1175.9
        Less urban1,2946.9
        Rural3501.9
        Unknown10.0
    Year of diagnosis
        1994–19973,35917.8
        1998–20003,80220.1
        2001–200511,72362.1
    Histologic type
        Melanoma NOS8,91147.2
        Nodular melanoma1,7649.3
        Superficial spreading4,57924.2
        Lentigo maligna2,22011.8
        Acral melanoma2661.4
        Other1,1446.1
    Stage at diagnosis*
        Local, thin8,98147.6
        Local, intermediate3,24217.2
        Local, thick2,00610.6
        Regional2,76614.6
        Distant9074.8
        Unknown9825.2
    Charlson Comorbidity Index
        011,32460.0
        14,31722.9
        ≥23,24317.2
    Influenza vaccination8,01742.5
        No10,86757.5
        Yes
    Surgery
        Surgery with wide margin10,89357.7
        Surgery without wide margin6,47134.3
        No surgery1,4547.7
        Unknown surgery660.3
    Lymph nodes removed
        Yes4,21322.3
        No14,32875.9
        Unknown3431.8
    Radiation
        Yes4882.6
        No18,13596.0
        Unknown2611.4
    • ↵* Thin lesions are defined as Breslow thickness <1 mm, intermediate are 1 to 2 mm, and thick are >2 mm.

    • MSA, metropolitan statistical area; NOS, not otherwise specified; PCP, primary care physician.

    • View popup
    Table 2. Predictors of Thin Melanoma Diagnosis in Patients Using Multivariable Logistic Regression (n = 17,902)*
    Thin MelanomasAdjusted Odds Ratio95% Wald CL
    n/N%
    Prior physician visits
        Neither PCP nor dermatologist1,025/2,27145.11.00Referent
        PCP only4,420/9,12248.51.080.98–1.21
        Dermatologist only479/92951.61.170.98–1.38
        Both PCP and dermatologist3,057/5,58054.81.261.12–1.41
    Age at diagnosis (years)
        67–754,543/8,26655.01.00Referent
        76–853,560/7,43447.90.780.73–0.84
        ≥86878/2,20239.90.580.52–0.65
    Sex
        Male5,407/10,71750.51.00Referent
        Female3,574/7,18549.71.060.99–1.14
    Race/ethnicity
        Non-Hispanic white8,500/16,95450.11.00Referent
        Non-Hispanic black29/10826.90.530.33–0.85
        Hispanic99/29034.10.630.49–0.83
        Asian/American Indian/Pacific Islander31/9831.60.510.32–0.82
        Other322/45271.21.791.43–2.26
    Marital status at diagnosis
        Married4,394/9,10848.21.00Referent
        Never married449/1,06042.40.860.74–0.98
        Separated/divorced272/64042.50.810.68–0.97
        Widowed1,306/3,41538.20.800.72–0.88
        Unknown2,560/3,67969.62.222.02–2.43
    Education level of residence
        Quintile 1 (lowest)1,607/3,63744.21.00Referent
        Quintile 21,786/3,66848.71.060.95–1.18
        Quintile 31,741/3,47650.11.141.01–1.29
        Quintile 41,871/3,56052.61.181.04–1.35
        Quintile 5 (highest)1,909/3,44655.41.251.08–1.46
    Median income of residence
        Quintile 1 (lowest)1,734/3,79545.71.00Referent
        Quintile 21,817/3,69949.11.040.94–1.17
        Quintile 31,715/3,46149.61.010.89–1.14
        Quintile 41,813/3,53051.41.010.89–1.15
        Quintile 5 (highest)1,835/3,30255.61.110.94–1.29
    MSA residence
        Large metropolitan5,037/10,00250.41.00Referent
        Metropolitan2,688/5,29950.70.950.86–1.05
        Urban508/1,05848.00.920.78–1.09
        Less urban596/1,21249.21.050.88–1.24
        Rural152/33046.10.980.75–1.29
    Year of diagnosis
        1994–19971,465/3,15546.41.00Referent
        1998–20001,758/3,56949.31.161.04–1.29
        2001–20055,758/11,17851.51.301.18–1.44
    Histologic type
        Melanoma NOS3,894/8,14847.81.00Referent
        Nodular melanoma180/1,73210.40.140.12–0.17
        Superficial spreading2,932/4,51465.02.091.93–2.26
        Lentigo maligna1,588/2,14574.03.252.90–3.63
        Acral melanoma78/26030.00.610.46–0.80
        Other309/1,10328.00.440.38–0.51
    Charlson Comorbidity Index
        05,633/10,75652.41.00Referent
        11,977/4,08648.40.870.80–0.94
        ≥21,371/3,06044.80.800.73–0.88
    Influenza vaccination
        No3,586/7,57747.21.00Referent
        Yes5,395/10,32552.31.131.05–1.21
    • Note: The Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results registry was adjusted for, but results are not presented.

    • ↵* Excluding people with unknown stage at diagnosis. Thin lesions are defined as Breslow thickness <1 mm.

    • CL, confidence limits; MSA, metropolitan statistical area; NOS, not otherwise specified; PCP, primary care physician.

    • View popup
    Table 3. Factors Associated with Melanoma Mortality in Patients (n = 18,884)*
    CharacteristicsUnadjusted ModelMultivariable Model 1†Multivariable Model 2‡
    Prior physician visits
        Neither PCP nor dermatologist1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)
        PCP only0.82 (0.73–0.93)0.84 (0.74–0.95)0.87 (0.77–0.99)
        Dermatologist only0.69 (0.55–0.86)0.79 (0.63–1.00)0.80 (0.64–1.01)
        Both PCP and dermatologist0.59 (0.51–0.67)0.66 (0.57–0.76)0.72 (0.62–0.83)
    Age at diagnosis (years)
        67–751.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)
        76–851.29 (1.17–1.42)1.21 (1.10–1.33)1.08 (0.98–1.19)
        ≥861.94 (1.71–2.21)1.76 (1.53–2.02)1.38 (1.20–1.59)
    Sex
        Male1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)
        Female0.79 (0.72–0.87)0.71 (0.65–0.79)0.70 (0.63–0.77)
    Race/ethnicity
        Non-Hispanic white1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)
        Non-Hispanic black2.33 (1.59–3.41)1.22 (0.82–1.82)1.11 (0.75–1.65)
        Hispanic1.67 (1.26–2.20)1.21 (0.91–1.62)1.01 (0.76–1.35)
        Asian/American Indian/Pacific Islander1.71 (1.09–2.69)1.53 (0.95–2.44)1.37 (0.85–2.20)
        Other0.11 (0.05–0.24)0.16 (0.07–0.36)0.22 (0.10–0.49)
    Marital status
        Married1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)
        Never married1.51 (1.29–1.77)1.33 (1.13–1.56)1.31 (1.11–1.54)
        Separated/divorced1.22 (0.98–1.51)1.25 (1.00–1.55)1.21 (0.97–1.51)
        Widowed1.45 (1.31–1.61)1.30 (1.16–1.46)1.24 (1.10–1.39)
        Unknown0.36 (0.30–0.42)0.40 (0.34–0.47)0.55 (0.46–0.65)
    Education level of residence
        Quintile 1 (lowest)1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)
        Quintile 20.79 (0.70–0.90)0.93 (0.81–1.07)0.96 (0.83–1.11)
        Quintile 30.85 (0.75–0.97)0.91 (0.78–1.06)0.97 (0.83–1.13)
        Quintile 40.79 (0.69–0.90)0.98 (0.83–1.16)1.00 (0.85–1.18)
        Quintile 5 (highest)0.69 (0.60–0.79)0.91 (0.75–1.12)1.00 (0.82–1.23)
    Median income of residence
        Quintile 1 (lowest)1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)
        Quintile 20.87 (0.76–0.99)0.91 (0.79–1.04)0.94 (0.81–1.08)
        Quintile 30.91 (0.80–1.03)0.97 (0.83–1.14)1.03 (0.88–1.21)
        Quintile 40.91 (0.80–1.04)1.04 (0.87–1.23)1.10 (0.93–1.30)
        Quintile 5 (highest)0.69 (0.60–0.79)0.86 (0.70–1.07)0.90 (0.73–1.11)
    MSA residence
        Large metropolitan1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)
        Metropolitan1.09 (0.99–1.21)0.99 (0.87–1.13)1.01 (0.88–1.15)
        Urban1.18 (0.98–−1.40)1.15 (0.93–1.42)1.14 (0.93–1.41)
        Less urban1.18 (1.00–1.39)1.13 (0.91–1.40)1.09 (0.88–1.36)
        Rural0.88 (0.61–1.25)0.78 (0.53–1.16)0.83 (0.56–1.23)
    Year of diagnosis
        1994–19971.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)
        1998–20000.90 (0.80–1.02)0.86 (0.76–0.98)0.93 (0.81–1.05)
        2001–20050.94 (0.84–1.05)0.85 (0.75–0.97)0.90 (0.79–1.03)
    Histology type
        Melanoma, NOS1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)
        Nodular melanoma1.74 (1.55–1.95)1.90 (1.68–2.14)1.14 (1.00–1.29)
        Superficial spreading0.35 (0.31–0.40)0.51 (0.44–0.59)0.72 (0.63–0.83)
        Lentigo maligna0.14 (0.10–0.19)0.21 (0.16–0.28)0.39 (0.29–0.53)
        Acral melanoma1.11 (0.82–1.50)1.05 (0.77–1.44)0.93 (0.68–1.27)
        Other0.98 (0.83–1.16)1.05 (0.88–1.25)0.76 (0.64–0.91)
    Stage at diagnosis§
        Local, thin1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)
        Local, intermediate3.00 (2.43–3.70)2.70 (2.18–3.35)
        Local, thick8.62 (7.11–10.45)6.65 (5.43–8.14)
        Regional/distant26.82 (22.81–31.55)16.48 (13.79–19.70)
        Unknown12.68 (10.31–15.60)6.03 (4.81–7.56)
    Charlson Comorbidity Index
        01.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)
        11.20 (1.08–1.34)1.15 (1.03–1.28)1.18 (1.06–1.31)
        2+1.48 (1.32–1.66)1.42 (1.26–1.61)1.29 (1.15–1.45)
    Influenza vaccination
        No1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)
        Yes0.79 (0.72–0.86)0.91 (0.83–0.99)0.97 (0.89–1.07)
    Surgery
        Surgery without wide margin1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)
        Surgery with wide margin0.95 (0.85–1.05)0.75 (0.67–0.83)0.75 (0.67–0.84)
        No/unknown surgery6.52 (5.79–7.35)4.50 (3.94–5.13)2.51 (2.19–2.88)
    Lymph node removal
        No/unknown1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)
        Yes1.42 (1.28–1.56)1.31 (1.18–1.45)0.78 (0.70–0.87)
    Radiation therapy
        No/unknown1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)1.00 (referent)
        Yes10.12 (8.88–11.54)3.65 (3.15–4.22)2.16 (1.87–2.50)
    • ↵* After excluding people with in situ lesions but including those with unknown stage. Mortality refers to melanoma specific mortality, not all-cause mortality.

    • ↵† Model 1 adjusted for all factors shown in table plus Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results registry but did not adjust for stage at diagnosis.

    • ↵‡ Model 2 further adjusted model 1 for stage at diagnosis.

    • ↵§ Thin lesions are defined as Breslow thickness <1 mm, intermediate are 1 to 2 mm, and thick are >2 mm.

    • MSA, metropolitan statistical area; NOS, not otherwise specified; PCP, primary care physician.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of the American Board of Family     Medicine: 26 (6)
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
Vol. 26, Issue 6
November-December 2013
  • 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.
The Influence of Dermatologist and Primary Care Physician Visits on Melanoma Outcomes Among Medicare Beneficiaries
(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.
15 + 2 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
The Influence of Dermatologist and Primary Care Physician Visits on Melanoma Outcomes Among Medicare Beneficiaries
Richard G. Roetzheim, Ji-Hyun Lee, Jeanne M. Ferrante, Eduardo C. Gonzalez, Ren Chen, Kate J. Fisher, Kymia Love-Jackson, Ellen P. McCarthy
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Nov 2013, 26 (6) 637-647; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2013.06.130042

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
The Influence of Dermatologist and Primary Care Physician Visits on Melanoma Outcomes Among Medicare Beneficiaries
Richard G. Roetzheim, Ji-Hyun Lee, Jeanne M. Ferrante, Eduardo C. Gonzalez, Ren Chen, Kate J. Fisher, Kymia Love-Jackson, Ellen P. McCarthy
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Nov 2013, 26 (6) 637-647; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2013.06.130042
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Notes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Continuous Primary Care Is Central to Comprehensive Cancer Care: Are We Ready to Meet Growing Needs?
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Family Physicians Improve Patient Health Care Quality and Outcomes
  • Continuous Primary Care Is Central to Comprehensive Cancer Care: Are We Ready to Meet Growing Needs?
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Associations Between Modifiable Preconception Care Indicators and Pregnancy Outcomes
  • Perceptions and Preferences for Defining Biosimilar Products in Prescription Drug Promotion
  • Evaluating Pragmatism of Lung Cancer Screening Randomized Trials with the PRECIS-2 Tool
Show more Original Research

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Dermatology
  • Medicare
  • Melanoma
  • Primary Care Physicians
  • SEER Program

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