Specialists are hard to get a face-to-face with even with socialized medicine (personal anecdote from Sweden). I assume that one thing that transcends national

Specialists are hard to get a face-to-face with even with socialized medicine (personal anecdote from Sweden). I assume that one thing that transcends national borders is that unless your symptoms suggest anything life-threatening care will be administered in accordance with heuristics. The most probable diagnosis is set, and it is assumed that a patient will return if things does not improve. However, failing to communicate to a patient that a diagnosis is provisional might serve to undermine their faith in the healthcare system leading to periods of fatigue wherein one doesn't have the self-efficacy to continue seeking care if things haven't improved even if quality of life is severely impacted. From my limited understanding of the US healthcare system I'd imagine you don't want an excess of cases because each case 1. Is a responsibility, and thus a liability, and 2. every patient your staff needs to accommodate is draining (risk of overwork). If that would apply to a country with socialized medicine I imagine that Item 1. receives significantly less consideration but that Item 2. is still very much considered. If a unit isn't a first-line care-provider they can in theory be a bit more guarded about who they receive, while first-line just has to bear whatever comes through the doors. I feel as if I'm shifting to a different point of discussion but I still struggle not to mention the fact that a specialist may not be readily at hand depending on what city you are in.