---
kind: "range"
citation: "20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1525–404.1530"
title: "20"
from: "404.1525"
to: "404.1530"
count: 6
url: "https://uscodex.org/cfr/20/404.1525..404.1530"
---

# §404.1525. Listing of Impairments in appendix 1.

- (a) **What is the purpose of the Listing of Impairments?** The Listing of Impairments (the listings) is in appendix 1 of this subpart. It describes for each of the major body systems impairments that we consider to be severe enough to prevent an individual from doing any gainful activity, regardless of his or her age, education, or work experience.
- (b) **How is appendix 1 organized?** There are two parts in appendix 1:
  - (1) **Part A—** contains criteria that apply to individuals age 18 and over. We may also use part A for individuals who are under age 18 if the disease processes have a similar effect on adults and children.
  - (2) **Part B—** contains criteria that apply only to individuals who are under age 18; we never use the listings in part B to evaluate individuals who are age 18 or older. In evaluating disability for a person under age 18, we use part B first. If the criteria in part B do not apply, we may use the criteria in part A when those criteria give appropriate consideration to the effects of the impairment(s) in children. To the extent possible, we number the provisions in part B to maintain a relationship with their counterparts in part A.
- (c) **How do we use the listings?**
  - (1) **Most body system sections in parts A and B of appendix 1 are in two parts—** an introduction, followed by the specific listings.
  - (2) The introduction to each body system contains information relevant to the use of the listings in that body system; for example, examples of common impairments in the body system and definitions used in the listings for that body system. We may also include specific criteria for establishing a diagnosis, confirming the existence of an impairment, or establishing that your impairment(s) satisfies the criteria of a particular listing in the body system. Even if we do not include specific criteria for establishing a diagnosis or confirming the existence of your impairment, you must still show that you have a severe medically determinable impairment(s), as defined in [§ 404.1521](/cfr/20/404.1521.md).
  - (3) In most cases, the specific listings follow the introduction in each body system, after the heading, Category of Impairments. Within each listing, we specify the objective medical and other findings needed to satisfy the criteria of that listing. We will find that your impairment(s) meets the requirements of a listing when it satisfies all of the criteria of that listing, including any relevant criteria in the introduction, and meets the duration requirement (see [§ 404.1509](/cfr/20/404.1509.md)).
  - (4) **Most of the listed impairments are permanent or expected to result in death.** For some listings, we state a specific period of time for which your impairment(s) will meet the listing. For all others, the evidence must show that your impairment(s) has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of at least 12 months.
  - (5) If your impairment(s) does not meet the criteria of a listing, it can medically equal the criteria of a listing. We explain our rules for medical equivalence in [§ 404.1526](/cfr/20/404.1526.md). We use the listings only to find that you are disabled or still disabled. If your impairment(s) does not meet or medically equal the criteria of a listing, we may find that you are disabled or still disabled at a later step in the sequential evaluation process.
- (d) **Can your impairment(s) meet a listing based only on a diagnosis?** No. Your impairment(s) cannot meet the criteria of a listing based only on a diagnosis. To meet the requirements of a listing, you must have a medically determinable impairment(s) that satisfies all of the criteria in the listing.
- (e) **How do we consider your symptoms when we determine whether your impairment(s) meets a listing?** Some listed impairments include symptoms, such as pain, as criteria. [Section 404.1529(d)(2)](/cfr/20/404.1529.md?p=d-2) explains how we consider your symptoms when your symptoms are included as criteria in a listing.

# §404.1526. Medical equivalence.

- (a) **What is medical equivalence?** Your impairment(s) is medically equivalent to a listed impairment in appendix 1 if it is at least equal in severity and duration to the criteria of any listed impairment.
- (b) **How do we determine medical equivalence?** We can find medical equivalence in three ways.
  - (1)
    - (i) If you have an impairment that is described in appendix 1, but —
      - (A) You do not exhibit one or more of the findings specified in the particular listing, or
      - (B) You exhibit all of the findings, but one or more of the findings is not as severe as specified in the particular listing,
    - (ii) We will find that your impairment is medically equivalent to that listing if you have other findings related to your impairment that are at least of equal medical significance to the required criteria.
  - (2) If you have an impairment(s) that is not described in appendix 1, we will compare your findings with those for closely analogous listed impairments. If the findings related to your impairment(s) are at least of equal medical significance to those of a listed impairment, we will find that your impairment(s) is medically equivalent to the analogous listing.
  - (3) If you have a combination of impairments, no one of which meets a listing (see [§ 404.1525(c)(3)](/cfr/20/404.1525.md?p=c-3)), we will compare your findings with those for closely analogous listed impairments. If the findings related to your impairments are at least of equal medical significance to those of a listed impairment, we will find that your combination of impairments is medically equivalent to that listing.
  - (4) [Section 404.1529(d)(3)](/cfr/20/404.1529.md?p=d-3) explains how we consider your symptoms, such as pain, when we make findings about medical equivalence.
- (c) **What evidence do we consider when we determine if your impairment(s) medically equals a listing?** When we determine if your impairment medically equals a listing, we consider all evidence in your case record about your impairment(s) and its effects on you that is relevant to this finding. We do not consider your vocational factors of age, education, and work experience (see, for example, [§ 404.1560(c)(1)](/cfr/20/404.1560.md?p=c-1)). We also consider the opinion given by one or more medical or psychological consultants designated by the Commissioner. (See [§ 404.1616](/cfr/20/404.1616.md).)
- (d) **Who is a designated medical or psychological consultant?** A medical or psychological consultant designated by the Commissioner includes any medical or psychological consultant employed or engaged to make medical judgments by the Social Security Administration, the Railroad Retirement Board, or a State agency authorized to make disability determinations. See [§ 404.1616](/cfr/20/404.1616.md) for the necessary qualifications for medical consultants and psychological consultants.
- (e) **Who is responsible for determining medical equivalence?**
  - (1) In cases where the State agency or other designee of the Commissioner makes the initial or reconsideration disability determination, a State agency medical or psychological consultant or other designee of the Commissioner (see [§ 404.1616](/cfr/20/404.1616.md) of this part) has the overall responsibility for determining medical equivalence.
  - (2) For cases in the disability hearing process or otherwise decided by a disability hearing officer, the responsibility for determining medical equivalence rests with either the disability hearing officer or, if the disability hearing officer's reconsideration determination is changed under [§ 404.918](/cfr/20/404.918.md) of this part, with the Associate Commissioner for Disability Policy or his or her delegate.
  - (3) For cases at the administrative law judge or Appeals Council level, the responsibility for deciding medical equivalence rests with the administrative law judge or Appeals Council.

# §404.1527. Evaluating opinion evidence for claims filed before March 27, 2017.


For claims filed (see [§ 404.614](/cfr/20/404.614.md)) before March 27, 2017, the rules in this section apply. For claims filed on or after March 27, 2017, the rules in [§ 404.1520c](/cfr/20/404.1520c.md) apply.

- (a) **Definitions.**
  - (1) **Medical opinions.** Medical opinions are statements from acceptable medical sources that reflect judgments about the nature and severity of your impairment(s), including your symptoms, diagnosis and prognosis, what you can still do despite impairment(s), and your physical or mental restrictions.
  - (2) **Treating source.** Treating source means your own acceptable medical source who provides you, or has provided you, with medical treatment or evaluation and who has, or has had, an ongoing treatment relationship with you. Generally, we will consider that you have an ongoing treatment relationship with an acceptable medical source when the medical evidence establishes that you see, or have seen, the source with a frequency consistent with accepted medical practice for the type of treatment and/or evaluation required for your medical condition(s). We may consider an acceptable medical source who has treated or evaluated you only a few times or only after long intervals (e.g., twice a year) to be your treating source if the nature and frequency of the treatment or evaluation is typical for your condition(s). We will not consider an acceptable medical source to be your treating source if your relationship with the source is not based on your medical need for treatment or evaluation, but solely on your need to obtain a report in support of your claim for disability. In such a case, we will consider the acceptable medical source to be a nontreating source.
- (b) **How we consider medical opinions.** In determining whether you are disabled, we will always consider the medical opinions in your case record together with the rest of the relevant evidence we receive. See [§ 404.1520b](/cfr/20/404.1520b.md).
- (c) **How we weigh medical opinions.** Regardless of its source, we will evaluate every medical opinion we receive. Unless we give a treating source's medical opinion controlling weight under [paragraph (c)(2)](#c-2) of this section, we consider all of the following factors in deciding the weight we give to any medical opinion.
  - (1) **Examining relationship.** Generally, we give more weight to the medical opinion of a source who has examined you than to the medical opinion of a medical source who has not examined you.
  - (2) **Treatment relationship.** Generally, we give more weight to medical opinions from your treating sources, since these sources are likely to be the medical professionals most able to provide a detailed, longitudinal picture of your medical impairment(s) and may bring a unique perspective to the medical evidence that cannot be obtained from the objective medical findings alone or from reports of individual examinations, such as consultative examinations or brief hospitalizations. If we find that a treating source's medical opinion on the issue(s) of the nature and severity of your impairment(s) is well-supported by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques and is not inconsistent with the other substantial evidence in your case record, we will give it controlling weight. When we do not give the treating source's medical opinion controlling weight, we apply the factors listed in paragraphs [(c)(2)(i)](#c-2-i) and [(c)(2)(ii)](#c-2-ii) of this section, as well as the factors in [paragraphs (c)(3) through (c)(6)](#c-3..c-6) of this section in determining the weight to give the medical opinion. We will always give good reasons in our notice of determination or decision for the weight we give your treating source's medical opinion.
    - (i) **Length of the treatment relationship and the frequency of examination.** Generally, the longer a treating source has treated you and the more times you have been seen by a treating source, the more weight we will give to the source's medical opinion. When the treating source has seen you a number of times and long enough to have obtained a longitudinal picture of your impairment, we will give the medical source's medical opinion more weight than we would give it if it were from a nontreating source.
    - (ii) **Nature and extent of the treatment relationship.** Generally, the more knowledge a treating source has about your impairment(s) the more weight we will give to the source's medical opinion. We will look at the treatment the source has provided and at the kinds and extent of examinations and testing the source has performed or ordered from specialists and independent laboratories. For example, if your ophthalmologist notices that you have complained of neck pain during your eye examinations, we will consider his or her medical opinion with respect to your neck pain, but we will give it less weight than that of another physician who has treated you for the neck pain. When the treating source has reasonable knowledge of your impairment(s), we will give the source's medical opinion more weight than we would give it if it were from a nontreating source.
  - (3) **Supportability.** The more a medical source presents relevant evidence to support a medical opinion, particularly medical signs and laboratory findings, the more weight we will give that medical opinion. The better an explanation a source provides for a medical opinion, the more weight we will give that medical opinion. Furthermore, because nonexamining sources have no examining or treating relationship with you, the weight we will give their medical opinions will depend on the degree to which they provide supporting explanations for their medical opinions. We will evaluate the degree to which these medical opinions consider all of the pertinent evidence in your claim, including medical opinions of treating and other examining sources.
  - (4) **Consistency.** Generally, the more consistent a medical opinion is with the record as a whole, the more weight we will give to that medical opinion.
  - (5) **Specialization.** We generally give more weight to the medical opinion of a specialist about medical issues related to his or her area of specialty than to the medical opinion of a source who is not a specialist.
  - (6) **Other factors.** When we consider how much weight to give to a medical opinion, we will also consider any factors you or others bring to our attention, or of which we are aware, which tend to support or contradict the medical opinion. For example, the amount of understanding of our disability programs and their evidentiary requirements that a medical source has, regardless of the source of that understanding, and the extent to which a medical source is familiar with the other information in your case record are relevant factors that we will consider in deciding the weight to give to a medical opinion.
- (d) **Medical source opinions on issues reserved to the Commissioner.** Opinions on some issues, such as the examples that follow, are not medical opinions, as described in [paragraph (a)(1)](#a-1) of this section, but are, instead, opinions on issues reserved to the Commissioner because they are administrative findings that are dispositive of a case; i.e., that would direct the determination or decision of disability.
  - (1) **Opinions that you are disabled.** We are responsible for making the determination or decision about whether you meet the statutory definition of disability. In so doing, we review all of the medical findings and other evidence that support a medical source's statement that you are disabled. A statement by a medical source that you are “disabled” or “unable to work” does not mean that we will determine that you are disabled.
  - (2) **Other opinions on issues reserved to the Commissioner.** We use medical sources, including your treating source, to provide evidence, including opinions, on the nature and severity of your impairment(s). Although we consider opinions from medical sources on issues such as whether your impairment(s) meets or equals the requirements of any impairment(s) in the Listing of Impairments in appendix 1 to this subpart, your residual functional capacity (see §§ [404.1545](/cfr/20/404.1545.md) and [404.1546](/cfr/20/404.1546.md)), or the application of vocational factors, the final responsibility for deciding these issues is reserved to the Commissioner.
  - (3) We will not give any special significance to the source of an opinion on issues reserved to the Commissioner described in paragraphs [(d)(1)](#d-1) and [(d)(2)](#d-2) of this section.
- (e) **Evidence from our Federal or State agency medical or psychological consultants.** The rules in [§ 404.1513a](/cfr/20/404.1513a.md) apply except that when an administrative law judge gives controlling weight to a treating source's medical opinion, the administrative law judge is not required to explain in the decision the weight he or she gave to the prior administrative medical findings in the claim.
- (f) **Opinions from medical sources who are not acceptable medical sources and from nonmedical sources.**
  - (1) **Consideration.** Opinions from medical sources who are not acceptable medical sources and from nonmedical sources may reflect the source's judgment about some of the same issues addressed in medical opinions from acceptable medical sources. Although we will consider these opinions using the same factors as listed in [paragraph (c)(1) through (c)(6)](#c-1..c-6) in this section, not every factor for weighing opinion evidence will apply in every case because the evaluation of an opinion from a medical source who is not an acceptable medical source or from a nonmedical source depends on the particular facts in each case. Depending on the particular facts in a case, and after applying the factors for weighing opinion evidence, an opinion from a medical source who is not an acceptable medical source or from a nonmedical source may outweigh the medical opinion of an acceptable medical source, including the medical opinion of a treating source. For example, it may be appropriate to give more weight to the opinion of a medical source who is not an acceptable medical source if he or she has seen the individual more often than the treating source, has provided better supporting evidence and a better explanation for the opinion, and the opinion is more consistent with the evidence as a whole.
  - (2) **Articulation.** The adjudicator generally should explain the weight given to opinions from these sources or otherwise ensure that the discussion of the evidence in the determination or decision allows a claimant or subsequent reviewer to follow the adjudicator's reasoning, when such opinions may have an effect on the outcome of the case. In addition, when an adjudicator determines that an opinion from such a source is entitled to greater weight than a medical opinion from a treating source, the adjudicator must explain the reasons in the notice of decision in hearing cases and in the notice of determination (that is, in the personalized disability notice) at the initial and reconsideration levels, if the determination is less than fully favorable.

# §404.1528. Reserved



# §404.1529. How we evaluate symptoms, including pain.

- (a) **General.** In determining whether you are disabled, we consider all your symptoms, including pain, and the extent to which your symptoms can reasonably be accepted as consistent with the objective medical evidence and other evidence. We will consider all of your statements about your symptoms, such as pain, and any description your medical sources or nonmedical sources may provide about how the symptoms affect your activities of daily living and your ability to work. However, statements about your pain or other symptoms will not alone establish that you are disabled. There must be objective medical evidence from an acceptable medical source that shows you have a medical impairment(s) which could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged and that, when considered with all of the other evidence (including statements about the intensity and persistence of your pain or other symptoms which may reasonably be accepted as consistent with the medical signs and laboratory findings), would lead to a conclusion that you are disabled. In evaluating the intensity and persistence of your symptoms, including pain, we will consider all of the available evidence, including your medical history, the medical signs and laboratory findings, and statements about how your symptoms affect you. We will then determine the extent to which your alleged functional limitations and restrictions due to pain or other symptoms can reasonably be accepted as consistent with the medical signs and laboratory findings and other evidence to decide how your symptoms affect your ability to work.
- (b) **Need for medically determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce your symptoms, such as pain.** Your symptoms, such as pain, fatigue, shortness of breath, weakness, or nervousness, will not be found to affect your ability to do basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings show that a medically determinable impairment(s) is present. Medical signs and laboratory findings, established by medically acceptable clinical or laboratory diagnostic techniques, must show the existence of a medical impairment(s) which results from anatomical, physiological, or psychological abnormalities and which could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged. In cases decided by a State agency (except in disability hearings under [§§ 404.914 through 404.918](/cfr/20/404.914..404.918.md) of this part and in fully favorable determinations made by State agency disability examiners alone under [§ 404.1615(c)(3)](/cfr/20/404.1615.md?p=c-3) of this part), a State agency medical or psychological consultant or other medical or psychological consultant designated by the Commissioner directly participates in determining whether your medically determinable impairment(s) could reasonably be expected to produce your alleged symptoms. In the disability hearing process, a medical or psychological consultant may provide an advisory assessment to assist a disability hearing officer in determining whether your impairment(s) could reasonably be expected to produce your alleged symptoms. At the administrative law judge hearing or Appeals Council level of the administrative review process, the adjudicator(s) may ask for and consider the opinion of a medical or psychological expert concerning whether your impairment(s) could reasonably be expected to produce your alleged symptoms. The finding that your impairment(s) could reasonably be expected to produce your pain or other symptoms does not involve a determination as to the intensity, persistence, or functionally limiting effects of your symptoms. We will develop evidence regarding the possibility of a medically determinable mental impairment when we have information to suggest that such an impairment exists, and you allege pain or other symptoms but the medical signs and laboratory findings do not substantiate any physical impairment(s) capable of producing the pain or other symptoms.
- (c) **Evaluating the intensity and persistence of your symptoms, such as pain, and determining the extent to which your symptoms limit your capacity for work—**
  - (1) **General.** When the medical signs or laboratory findings show that you have a medically determinable impairment(s) that could reasonably be expected to produce your symptoms, such as pain, we must then evaluate the intensity and persistence of your symptoms so that we can determine how your symptoms limit your capacity for work. In evaluating the intensity and persistence of your symptoms, we consider all of the available evidence from your medical sources and nonmedical sources about how your symptoms affect you. We also consider the medical opinions as explained in [§ 404.1520c](/cfr/20/404.1520c.md). [Paragraphs (c)(2) through (c)(4)](#c-2..c-4) of this section explain further how we evaluate the intensity and persistence of your symptoms and how we determine the extent to which your symptoms limit your capacity for work, when the medical signs or laboratory findings show that you have a medically determinable impairment(s) that could reasonably be expected to produce your symptoms, such as pain.
  - (2) **Consideration of objective medical evidence.** Objective medical evidence is evidence obtained from the application of medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques, such as evidence of reduced joint motion, muscle spasm, sensory deficit or motor disruption. Objective medical evidence of this type is a useful indicator to assist us in making reasonable conclusions about the intensity and persistence of your symptoms and the effect those symptoms, such as pain, may have on your ability to work. We must always attempt to obtain objective medical evidence and, when it is obtained, we will consider it in reaching a conclusion as to whether you are disabled. However, we will not reject your statements about the intensity and persistence of your pain or other symptoms or about the effect your symptoms have on your ability to work solely because the available objective medical evidence does not substantiate your statements.
  - (3) **Consideration of other evidence.** Because symptoms sometimes suggest a greater severity of impairment than can be shown by objective medical evidence alone, we will carefully consider any other information you may submit about your symptoms. The information that your medical sources or nonmedical sources provide about your pain or other symptoms (e.g., what may precipitate or aggravate your symptoms, what medications, treatments or other methods you use to alleviate them, and how the symptoms may affect your pattern of daily living) is also an important indicator of the intensity and persistence of your symptoms. Because symptoms, such as pain, are subjective and difficult to quantify, any symptom-related functional limitations and restrictions that your medical sources or nonmedical sources report, which can reasonably be accepted as consistent with the objective medical evidence and other evidence, will be taken into account as explained in [paragraph (c)(4)](#c-4) of this section in reaching a conclusion as to whether you are disabled. We will consider all of the evidence presented, including information about your prior work record, your statements about your symptoms, evidence submitted by your medical sources, and observations by our employees and other persons. [Section 404.1520c](/cfr/20/404.1520c.md) explains in detail how we consider medical opinions and prior administrative medical findings about the nature and severity of your impairment(s) and any related symptoms, such as pain. Factors relevant to your symptoms, such as pain, which we will consider include:
    - (i) Your daily activities;
    - (ii) The location, duration, frequency, and intensity of your pain or other symptoms;
    - (iii) Precipitating and aggravating factors;
    - (iv) The type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication you take or have taken to alleviate your pain or other symptoms;
    - (v) Treatment, other than medication, you receive or have received for relief of your pain or other symptoms;
    - (vi) Any measures you use or have used to relieve your pain or other symptoms (e.g., lying flat on your back, standing for 15 to 20 minutes every hour, sleeping on a board, etc.); and
    - (vii) **Other factors concerning your functional limitations and restrictions due to pain or other symptoms.**
  - (4) **How we determine the extent to which symptoms, such as pain, affect your capacity to perform basic work activities.** In determining the extent to which your symptoms, such as pain, affect your capacity to perform basic work activities, we consider all of the available evidence described in [paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(3)](#c-1..c-3) of this section. We will consider your statements about the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of your symptoms, and we will evaluate your statements in relation to the objective medical evidence and other evidence, in reaching a conclusion as to whether you are disabled. We will consider whether there are any inconsistencies in the evidence and the extent to which there are any conflicts between your statements and the rest of the evidence, including your history, the signs and laboratory findings, and statements by your medical sources or other persons about how your symptoms affect you. Your symptoms, including pain, will be determined to diminish your capacity for basic work activities to the extent that your alleged functional limitations and restrictions due to symptoms, such as pain, can reasonably be accepted as consistent with the objective medical evidence and other evidence.
- (d) **Consideration of symptoms in the disability determination process.** We follow a set order of steps to determine whether you are disabled. If you are not doing substantial gainful activity, we consider your symptoms, such as pain, to evaluate whether you have a severe physical or mental impairment(s), and at each of the remaining steps in the process. Sections [404.1520](/cfr/20/404.1520.md) and [404.1520a](/cfr/20/404.1520a.md) explain this process in detail. We also consider your symptoms, such as pain, at the appropriate steps in our review when we consider whether your disability continues. Sections [404.1579](/cfr/20/404.1579.md) and [404.1594](/cfr/20/404.1594.md) explain the procedure we follow in reviewing whether your disability continues.
  - (1) **Need to establish a severe medically determinable impairment(s).** Your symptoms, such as pain, fatigue, shortness of breath, weakness, or nervousness, are considered in making a determination as to whether your impairment or combination of impairment(s) is severe. (See [§ 404.1520(c)](/cfr/20/404.1520.md?p=c).)
  - (2) **Decision whether the Listing of Impairments is met.** Some listed impairments include symptoms usually associated with those impairments as criteria. Generally, when a symptom is one of the criteria in a listing, it is only necessary that the symptom be present in combination with the other criteria. It is not necessary, unless the listing specifically states otherwise, to provide information about the intensity, persistence, or limiting effects of the symptom as long as all other findings required by the specific listing are present.
  - (3) **Decision whether the Listing of Impairments is medically equaled.** If your impairment is not the same as a listed impairment, we must determine whether your impairment(s) is medically equivalent to a listed impairment. [Section 404.1526](/cfr/20/404.1526.md) explains how we make this determination. Under [§ 404.1526(b)](/cfr/20/404.1526.md?p=b), we will consider medical equivalence based on all evidence in your case record about your impairment(s) and its effects on you that is relevant to this finding. In considering whether your symptoms, signs, and laboratory findings are medically equal to the symptoms, signs, and laboratory findings of a listed impairment, we will look to see whether your symptoms, signs, and laboratory findings are at least equal in severity to the listed criteria. However, we will not substitute your allegations of pain or other symptoms for a missing or deficient sign or laboratory finding to raise the severity of your impairment(s) to that of a listed impairment. If the symptoms, signs, and laboratory findings of your impairment(s) are equivalent in severity to those of a listed impairment, we will find you disabled. If it does not, we will consider the impact of your symptoms on your residual functional capacity. (See [paragraph (d)(4)](#d-4) of this section.)
  - (4) **Impact of symptoms (including pain) on residual functional capacity.** If you have a medically determinable severe physical or mental impairment(s), but your impairment(s) does not meet or equal an impairment listed in appendix 1 of this subpart, we will consider the impact of your impairment(s) and any related symptoms, including pain, on your residual functional capacity. (See [§ 404.1545](/cfr/20/404.1545.md).)

# §404.1530. Need to follow prescribed treatment.

- (a) **What treatment you must follow.** In order to get benefits, you must follow treatment prescribed by your medical source(s) if this treatment is expected to restore your ability to work.
- (b) **When you do not follow prescribed treatment.** If you do not follow the prescribed treatment without a good reason, we will not find you disabled or, if you are already receiving benefits, we will stop paying you benefits.
- (c) **Acceptable reasons for failure to follow prescribed treatment.** We will consider your physical, mental, educational, and linguistic limitations (including any lack of facility with the English language) when determining if you have an acceptable reason for failure to follow prescribed treatment. The following are examples of a good reason for not following treatment:
  - (1) **The specific medical treatment is contrary to the established teaching and tenets of your religion.**
  - (2) The prescribed treatment would be cataract surgery for one eye, when there is an impairment of the other eye resulting in a severe loss of vision and is not subject to improvement through treatment.
  - (3) Surgery was previously performed with unsuccessful results and the same surgery is again being recommended for the same impairment.
  - (4) The treatment because of its magnitude (e.g., open heart surgery), unusual nature (e.g., organ transplant), or other reason is very risky for you; or
  - (5) **The treatment involves amputation of an extremity, or a major part of an extremity.**