ArticleBMJ open2013
Do men consult less than women? An analysis of routinely collected UK general practice data.
Article in BMJ open, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 310 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
310 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 599 citations in OpenAlex.
- Map the prevalence of irritable bowel syndrome across China: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Evaluating the Effectiveness of Primary Care Health Checks at Assessing Cardiovascular Risks among Ethnic Minorities in the UK: A Systematic Review.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Factors associated with receiving a Functional Disorder diagnostic label: A systematic review.PloS one · 2025Pooled it
- Temperature-related mortality and associated vulnerabilities: evidence from Scotland using extended time-series datasets.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2022Pooled it
- Multimorbidity of non-communicable diseases in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2022Pooled it
- Trial
- Impact on all-cause mortality of a case prediction and prevention intervention designed to reduce secondary care utilisation: findings from a randomised controlled trial.Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2023Trial
- Evaluation of a National Health Service Machine-Learning Model for Hypertension Case-Finding: Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Trends in type 2 diabetes incidence and BMI at diagnosis by age, sex, and ethnicity, 2011-2024: a population-based analysis of the English National Diabetes Audit.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Article
- Observational
- 'You only care when it hurts' - men's engagement with their health: a qualitative interview study in Lower Austria.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Sex-Specific Association Between Socioeconomic Status and Stroke Mortality.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- Self-Medication Behaviors: Determinants, Motivations, and Safety Practices Among Health Sciences Students.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- ONS Health Insight Survey in general practice: insight, not oversight.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Article
- Missing men - why health promotion leaves them behind and how to bring them on board: results of a rapid qualitative evidence synthesis.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Later-Stage Diagnosis and Poorer Survival in Pancreatic Cancer Patients With Vague Symptoms: A Population-Based Study.United European gastroenterology journal · 2026Article
- Reimbursement restrictions reduce liver fibrosis screening in adults with diabetes in Ontario: a population-based interrupted time series analysis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Trends and inequities in primary and emergency care use among older adults in British Columbia: an analysis across age, sex, income, and rurality (2018-2023).International journal for equity in health · 2026Article
- Article
- Superior oblique myokymia: diagnostic criteria and long-term outcome.Journal of neurology · 2026Article
250 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo examine whether gender differences in primary care consultation rates (1) vary by age and deprivation status and (2) diminish when consultation for reproductive reasons or common underlying morbidities are accounted for.
designCross-sectional study of a cohort of patients registered with general practice.
settingUK primary care. SUBJECTS: Patients (1 869 149 men and 1 916 898 women) registered with 446 eligible practices in 2010. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary care consultation rate.
resultsThis study analyses routinely collected primary care consultation data. The crude consultation rate was 32% lower in men than women. The magnitude of gender difference varied across the life course, and there was no 'excess' female consulting in early and later life. The greatest gender gap in primary care consultations was seen among those aged between 16 and 60 years. Gender differences in consulting were higher in people from more deprived areas than among those from more affluent areas. Accounting for reproductive-related consultations diminished but did not eradicate the gender gap. However, consultation rates in men and women who had comparable underlying morbidities (as assessed by receipt of medication) were similar; men in receipt of antidepressant medication were only 8% less likely to consult than women in receipt of antidepressant medication (relative risk (RR) 0.916, 95% CI 0.913 to 0.918), and men in receipt of medication to treat cardiovascular disease were just 5% less likely to consult (RR=0.950, 95% CI 0.948 to 0.952) than women receiving similar medication. These small gender differences diminished further, particularly for depression (RR=0.950, 95% CI 0.947 to 0.953), after also taking account of reproductive consultations.
conclusionsOverall gender differences in consulting are most marked between the ages of 16 and 60 years; these differences are only partially accounted for by consultations for reproductive reasons. Differences in consultation rates between men and women were largely eradicated when comparing men and women in receipt of medication for similar underlying morbidities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.