Diag/ MD Eval denials in California external review

In the California DMHC record, independent physician reviewers decided 776 published external-review cases involving diag/ md eval and overturned the plan’s denial in 47.7%. That is a historical result among cases that reached this program, not a forecast for an individual appeal.

California DMHC decisions
776
2001–2025
Overturned
47.7%
370 denials reversed

By denial reason

The stated reason changes which facts, criteria, and records matter.
Denial reasonDecisionsOverturned
medical necessity734
49.7%
experimental / investigational34
11.8%

Within this category

Subcategories with at least 15 published decisions.
SubcategoryDecisionsOverturned
SCP Consult Refer348
59.2%
OON Referral183
27.3%
Other132
51.5%
Ongoing OON Tx57
36.8%
Req 2nd Opin/OON28
46.4%
Referral out of MG17
29.4%

What the insurer actually argued

Denials fall into different categories, and they don’t succeed equally — so the reason on your letter changes how you should answer it.
Reason givenDecisionsOverturned
Medical Necessity
The plan said the care wasn’t medically necessary. The most common fight, and the most winnable.
734
49.7%
Experimental/Investigational
The plan called the treatment unproven. These turn on published evidence, so the appeal is a literature argument.
34
11.8%
Urgent Care
Expedited reviews, decided in days rather than weeks.
8
12.5%
Typical time to a decision
18 days
Most land between 7 and 21 days
Handled as urgent
29.1%
Expedited when a delay would cause harm
Recent direction
Rising
47.5%56.1% overturned, last three years

What the reviewers wrote

Excerpts from the independent reviewers’ published findings — the actual reasoning, quoted, not summarised.

Where the denial was overturned

Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient has requested authorization and coverage for bilateral breast implant removal, bilateral capsulectomy, bilateral breast reconstruction, and bilateral reinsertion of breast implants to be performed in one surgical procedure. Researchers state that traditionally, “capsular contracture is treated surgically, although it is important to note that treatment is only indicated in grades III and IV capsular contracture. The Baker classification describes four grades of capsular contracture, with grade I being a normal, soft breast; grade II being a minimally firm breast; grade III being a moderately firm breast with some visible deformity; and IV being a painful, hard, distorted breast. Grade III and IV contractures typically require surgical management.
Medical Necessity · 2019 · IMR MN19-31031
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient has requested authorization and coverage for medication management appointments once every two weeks through 2024 and/or one hour per week of one-to-one dialectical behavior therapy (DBT). Findings: The physician reviewer found that the American Association of Community Psychiatrists Level of Care Utilization System (LOCUS) provides a reliable framework for determining the appropriate level of care for adults needing mental health treatment. Using LOCUS, providers score patients on a scale of 1-5 using a six-pronged Dimensional Rating System. The six dimensions include: (1) risk of harm; (2) functional status; (3) medical, addictive and psychiatric comorbidity; (4) recovery environment (a. stressors and b. supports); (5) treatment and recovery history; and (6) engagement.
Medical Necessity · 2022 · IMR MN22-36751

Where the denial was upheld

Worth reading too — these show what an appeal has to overcome.
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: An female enrollee has requested authorization and coverage for referrals to head and neck surgery, maxillofacial surgery, chiropractic, cardiology, pulmonology and a bone density test for evaluation of the enrollee’s neck pain, back pain, chest pain, and headaches. Findings: The physician reviewer found that with regard to the request for referral to head and neck surgery and referral to maxillofacial surgery, the records indicate that the patient was previously evaluated by a head and neck surgeon. This evaluation included a history, an examination, an assessment and plan. The provider did not find that the patient was a candidate for any surgical intervention and recommended treatment with corticosteroid nasal spray and salt water nasal spray. Further, the patient had subsequent imaging of the sinuses and nasal septum both with CT and MRI.
Medical Necessity · 2017 · IMR MN17-25139
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient has requested authorization and coverage for services with a tertiary level of care physician who is dually board certified in both obstetrics and gynecology and reproductive endocrinology and infertility. Reproductive endocrinology and infertility medicine is a subspecialty of obstetrics and gynecology. As the name suggests, and according to the American Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology (ABOG), this subspecialty focuses on complex reproductive disorders. This may include the surgical management of these conditions. However, it should be noted that physicians in the field of general obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN) also manage a wide range of conditions on a routine basis.
Medical Necessity · 2022 · IMR MN22-36727

Figures and quotations on this page come from 42,749 published decisions in the California DMHC Independent Medical Review dataset. These are California external-review outcomes. Other state and federal programs have different eligibility rules, processes, and current availability; the rates here do not transfer to those programs or predict an individual result. Excerpts are quoted verbatim from the public record and describe this category of care generally, not any individual case.

How to use this in your appeal

These outcomes describe eligible cases completed through California DMHC’s Independent Medical Review program. They do not estimate the chance that an internal appeal, an external review in another jurisdiction, or your individual case will succeed. Use the record to identify evidence patterns involving diag/ md eval, then check the rights and deadlines that apply to your plan.

SOURCE: CALIFORNIA DMHC INDEPENDENT MEDICAL REVIEW OUTCOMES (CHHS OPEN DATA) · AGGREGATES + DEIDENTIFIED DECISION EXCERPTS/REFERENCE IDS · METHODOLOGY

Not legal or medical advice. Coverage Rights is a self-help tool that helps you prepare your own appeal. For advice about your specific situation, talk to a licensed attorney or your doctor.

Denied for diag/ md eval? Use the California record to prepare.

Explain my denial — freeStart my appeal · $39