Cookie policy notice

By continuing to use this site you agree to our cookies policy below:
Since 26 May 2011, the law now states that cookies on websites can ony be used with your specific consent. Cookies allow us to ensure that you enjoy the best browsing experience.

This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Declaring interest in Carr-Hill formula

Dr Hank Beerstecher comments on my postings on the BMA website to the effect

that I was a potential Carr-Hill loser requiring

a MPIG despite a weighting of 1.36 (Letter, May 12).

Those comments were made in the context of inaccurate Scottish Carr-Hill allocations, a deficient ready reckoner and some uncertainty over how to input the data required.

I reject his charge of failing to declare any interest because I was one of very few GPC members who made personal details freely available and because many contributors to

this debate have described the outcome of

Carr-Hill calculations without declaring their own positions within the lottery of current resource allocation.

The new Scottish allocations are being road-tested by some members of the Scottish GPC and indications are that my new figures are far more modest, and I may well just avoid MPIG.

Dr Brian Keighley

Balfron, Stirlingshire

Rate this article 

Click to rate

  • 1 star out of 5
  • 2 stars out of 5
  • 3 stars out of 5
  • 4 stars out of 5
  • 5 stars out of 5

0 out of 5 stars

Have your say