Share this site! The Safe Patient Project is a Consumers Union campaign focused on eliminating medical harm, improving FDA oversight of prescription drugs and promoting disclosure laws that give information to consumers about health care safety and quality.

Rhode Island Rated Among Worst In Nation For Failing to Keep Patients Informed About Bad Doctors

Consumers Reports News Release:

For Immediate Release:  Tuesday, March 29, 2016

Contact:  Michael McCauley,, 415-431-6747, ext 7606 (office) or 415-902-537 (cell)


Consumer Reports:  Rhode Island Rated Among Worst In Nation

For Failing to Keep Patients Informed About Bad Doctors


State Medical Boards Urged to Improve Public Access to Disciplinary

Records And Require Physicians on Probation to Tell Patients


YONKERS, NY — A Consumer Reports review of medical board websites in all 50 states and the District of Columbia found that Rhode Island earned one of the lowest ratings in the country for failing to provide the public easy access to the disciplinary records of doctors licensed to practice in the state.   As a result, Rhode Island residents face a challenging time finding out whether their doctor has been put on probation for misconduct, made malpractice payouts, or been convicted of crimes.


“Patients have a right to know whether their doctor has been disciplined for bad behavior, especially when it could endanger their health,” said Lisa McGiffert, Director of Consumer Reports’ Safe Patient Project.  “But Rhode Island makes it very hard to find out if a doctor practicing in the state has a history of harming patients or putting them at risk.”


The review of medical board websites is featured in “What You Don’t Know About Your Doctor Could Hurt You,”  the cover story of the latest issue of Consumer Reports.  The article highlights some of the challenges patients face when checking up on doctors and includes tips for helping consumers find a good physician and what to do if they have been harmed during treatment.


Medical boards are state government agencies responsible for licensing and disciplining doctors and investigating complaints about them.  While most doctors have clean records, thousands of doctors around the country have been put on probation by state medical boards for a variety of offenses, including sexual misconduct, drug and alcohol abuse, overprescribing controlled substances, and other unprofessional or dangerous practices.  Most of these doctors are allowed to continue seeing patients.


In addition, doctors can be disciplined by the hospitals where they work for misconduct or by federal regulatory and law enforcement agencies for such offenses as Medicare fraud, abusing prescription drugs, or drug related crimes.   Doctors who harm patients also can be the subject of malpractice suits.


Consumer Reports and the Informed Patient Institute, a nonprofit group that provides consumers with information about healthcare quality and cost, analyzed medical board websites to see whether they provided easy access to complete information about doctors, rating them on a scale of 1 to 100.  The Rhode Island Board of Medical Licensure and Discipline’s website received a score of 34, among the lowest in the country.


  • The Rhode Island Medical Board doesn’t make it particularly easy for users to search online for information about their doctor. The website’s homepage does not clearly indicate where to go to search for a physician’s profile.   Instead of having a consumer-friendly “Look Up Your Doctor” link on the home page, the website features a “Licensing Information” link and then users must select a “Verify a License” link to access the doctor profile search.  Once on the search page (which is operated by the Department of Health and shared with other professionals), users are only able to search using the doctor’s name and license number (which is not known by most users).  They cannot search by other factors such as specialty or location.  The site does allow searches by status of license, which is a nice feature for quick searches for doctors with clean records.


  • Rhode Island earned very good marks for enabling patients to file a complaint about a doctor. The Medical Board’s website includes a plain language description of the complaint process and enables users to submit those complaints online.  However, the website does not spell out how soon complaints must be submitted to the board after a patient encounters misconduct.


  • The Rhode Island Medical Board received good marks for the information it discloses about disciplinary actions it has taken against doctors licensed in the state. But users have to go to two separate places on the website to get a doctor’s complete history.  The board’s website links to an alphabetical list of all doctors with disciplinary actions dating back to 1987.  This list includes a link to the board’s formal disciplinary orders for each doctor and a brief description of the action taken.  But on each doctor’s profile, the information is less complete, with no link to board orders and, at least in some cases, no indication on the profile that an action had been taken.  The board should include all of the information on the doctor’s profile.


  • Finally, the Rhode Island Medical Board received poor marks for not posting a doctor profile on its website that provides a full picture of each licensed doctor’s history, including information about disciplinary actions against the doctor taken by hospitals and the federal government, malpractice payouts, and whether the doctor has been convicted of any crimes.


To help ensure patients can find out whether their doctor has a history of misconduct more easily, Consumers Union urged all state medical boards to adopt a number of reforms to help make their websites more consumer-friendly, including:


  • Use easily understandable search terms on medical board home pages and eye catching graphics to help consumers quickly find doctor-specific information.


  • Include a plain language summary of any disciplinary actions taken by the medical board on a physician’s profile that includes the date, reason, duration, and restrictions tied to the order, as well as links to documents with more detailed information.


  • In addition to board disciplinary orders, provide more comprehensive information on all physicians, including information about malpractice lawsuits, disciplinary actions taken by hospitals and federal agencies, and criminal convictions.


  • Allow the public to file complaints online and provide clear information about how complaints are handled, including expected time frames and when and how the complainant will be notified of the outcome.


While these kinds of website improvements will make it easier for consumers to check up on their doctors, Consumers Union has urged medical boards to require doctors on probation to inform their patients.  “The onus shouldn’t be on patients to investigate their physicians,” said McGiffert.  “Doctors on probation should be required to tell their patients of their status.” A Consumer Reports survey found that 82 percent of consumers are in favor of requiring doctors to tell their patients if they are on probation and why.


At the national level, Consumer Reports has advocated for the National Practitioners Data Bank, a federal repository that includes information about disciplinary actions taken by state medical boards, hospitals, as well as malpractice payments, to be open to the public.  Only hospitals, doctors, law enforcement, insurance companies, and a few other select groups are currently granted access.  Medical boards should also have free access to the Data Bank when checking on licensed doctors.




© 2016 Consumer Reports. The material above is intended for legitimate news entities only; it may not be used for advertising or promotional purposes. Consumer Reports® is an expert, independent nonprofit organization whose mission is to work for a fair, just, and safe marketplace for all consumers and to empower consumers to protect themselves. We accept no advertising and pay for all the products we test. We are not beholden to any commercial interest. Our income is derived from the sale of Consumer Reports®,® and our other publications and information products, services, fees, and noncommercial contributions and grants. Our Ratings and reports are intended solely for the use of our readers. Neither the Ratings nor the reports may be used in advertising or for any other commercial purpose without our permission. Consumer Reports will take all steps open to it to prevent commercial use of its materials, its name, or the name of Consumer Reports®.