Cover: London Patient Choice Project Evaluation

London Patient Choice Project Evaluation

A model of patients’ choices of hospital from stated and revealed preference choice data

Published Jun 30, 2005

by Peter Burge, Nancy Devlin, John Appleby, Charlene Rohr, Jonathan Grant

Download eBook for Free

Full Document

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.8 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Summary Only

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.2 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

The London Patient Choice Project (LPCP) was established to offer choices to patients who were clinically eligible for treatment and had been waiting for treatment at an NHS London hospital beyond a target waiting time. This report covers the choice process and the trade-offs patients are willing to make in order to obtain earlier treatment. The approach adopted uses a disaggregate discrete choice framework with both stated preference (SP) survey data and revealed preference (RP) choice data. We provide insights into how patients value various aspects of their current choices and how they may value choices that are currently outside of the scope of the LPCP. The analysis identifies reputation of hospital as one of the key drivers of choice. The modelling results inform policy makers of the potential benefits of different ways of structuring and informing patients’ choices, with the potential for far greater customisation according to the patient.

Research conducted by

The research described in this report was prepared for the London Patient Choice Project Team, Department of Health and was conducted by RAND Europe.

This report is part of the RAND technical report series. RAND technical reports may include research findings on a specific topic that is limited in scope or intended for a narrow audience; present discussions of the methodology employed in research; provide literature reviews, survey instruments, modeling exercises, guidelines for practitioners and research professionals, and supporting documentation; or deliver preliminary findings. All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure that they meet high standards for research quality and objectivity.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.