Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Published 24 July 2008, doi:10.1136/bmj.a953
Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a953
Fiona Godlee, editor, BMJ
fgodlee@bmj.com
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
It may seem parochial for the BMJ to use so much space discussing the NHS—and the English NHS at that. But I make no apologies—firstly, because if doctors are to take the lead in health care, as they must and as they are being encouraged to do, they need to understand the systems that deliver it. Secondly, because the wider world is watching what may come to be known as the English experiment. As evidence of this, the New England Journal of Medicine has published another paper on Englands use of quality indicators and performance payments. As Alison Tonks describes it (doi: 10.1136/bmj.a891), the paper from Martin Rolands group in Manchester finds that GPs professionalism outweighs temptations to game the system. To minimise overtreatment, GPs are allowed to exclude clinically inappropriate patients from target calculations, but rates of such "exception reporting" among English general practices were low. I find
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
Read all Rapid Responses