Dear Editor,

The no-child-left-behind program grades schools on the basis of test- scores on their pupils. Waters, Lefevre, and Budetti have arguably developed a far more valid and relevant measure of school-performance by assessing malpractice-experience, as a function of medical school.

It seems anomalous, even negligent, that the authors would develop data on which medical schools produce graduates who experience little litigation, more litigation and most litigation, but omit publication of those specific data, according to named medical schools. Such publication would doubtless be incendiary, among medical schools in the third tier and maybe even in the second but wouldn't the authors best serve the public interest by releasing such data, the better to inform prospective medical students, in advance, of the risks to which they may expose themselves and their future patients, if any, by accepting admission to certain medical schools? Shouldn't there be a National Medical School Data Bank, available to prospective medical students to enable them to choose medical schools rationally?

If not, what justification is there for the National Practitioner Data Bank, which keeps track of the dirt on physicians? A physician, if "bad", may hurt a few patients. A medical school, if "bad", may produce hundreds of "bad doctors" who may hurt thousands of patients.