THE opinions of Cllr Loakes and the PCT's Dr Pui-Ling Li and Sally Gorham about the Doctor Foster Intelligence (DFI) report are surprising (Guardian, March 27).
The DFI report consists of a discussion and a statistical annex. The latter lists all the postcodes in the deprived wards and, for each, provides some socio-economic data and a series of index numbers, which allegedly demonstrate how likely the people living in that postcode are to suffer from a range of serious diseases.
The objective is to provide healthcare professionals with a clear idea of greatest need, so that they can tailor their interventions appropriately.
However, the report is patently flawed: l The analysis of disease runs counter to previous expert opinion, including that of the PCT l The terminology used is sometimes misleading l The methodology is vague and unexplained l The proposed solutions to local health problems are for the most part unoriginal.
l The statistical annex includes many examples of postcodes that are void.
These are not quibbles. For example, DFI rightly concludes that the deprived wards have high rates of cervical cancer, yet in the statistical annex, cervical cancer is not even mentioned.
I sent an 11-page complaint about the report to the Dr Foster Intelligence Ethics Committee and it ruled in my favour.
The council too seems to agree that it has bought a pup, admitting to me under the Freedom of Information Act that the report has never been used to fashion or operationalise interventions'.
Nick Tiratsoo, Odessa Road, Leytonstone
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article