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

Would your practice be a winner or loser?



• Rural GMS practice with a list size of 4,000 relatively old patients.

• Low additional needs.

• Under the current formula overall practice weighting is 1.11.

• Under revised formula, weighting falls to 0.95, or 1.09 with rurality adjustment.


Inner London

• Inner-London GMS practice with a list size of 5,361 relatively young patients.

• High additional needs.

• Under current formula overall practice weighting is 1.14.

• Under revised formula weighting would rise substantially to 1.28, or 1.20 with rurality adjustment.



• Urban PMS practice in a blue collar area of moderate means with practice list of 6,709.

• Age-sex index is above average with high additional needs.

• Weighting 1.21 under the current formula.

• Weighting drops dramatically to 1.07, or 1.06 with rurality adjustment.


Market town

• Large market town PMS practice with 16,567 comparatively affluent patients on list.

• Above average age-sex mix but low additional needs.

• Under current formula practice weighting is 1.02.

• Under revised formula weighting falls to 0.96, or 0.92 with rurality adjustment.


Young patients

• GMS practice with relatively young population of 8,595.

• High additional needs.

• Under current formula overall practice weighting is 1.17.

• Under revised formula weighting rises to 1.30, or 1.24 with rurality.



• GMS practice of 5,576 patients in a suburban area of moderate means.

• Age-sex weighting above average and additional needs comparatively high.

• Overall weighting under current formula is 1.09.

• New formula weighting would increase to 1.10,

or fall to 1.07 with rurality adjustment.

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