Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25031192›Full record

Observational studyBMJ open2014

Estimating smoking prevalence in general practice using data from the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF).

Kate Honeyford, Richard Baker, M John G Bankart, David R Jones

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMJ open, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Rationalising data use for general practice: a missed opportunity?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2016
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Kate HoneyfordDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5533-7693
Richard BakerDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
M John G BankartInstitute of Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK.
David R JonesDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo determine to what extent underlying data published as part of Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) can be used to estimate smoking prevalence within practice populations and local areas and to explore the usefulness of these estimates.

designCross-sectional, observational study of QOF smoking data. Smoking prevalence in general practice populations and among patients with chronic conditions was estimated by simple manipulation of QOF indicator data. Agreement between estimates from the integrated household survey (IHS) and aggregated QOF-based estimates was calculated. The impact of including smoking estimates in negative binomial regression models of counts of premature coronary heart disease (CHD) deaths was assessed.

settingPrimary care in the East Midlands.

participantsAll general practices in the area of study were eligible for inclusion (230). 14 practices were excluded due to incomplete QOF data for the period of study (2006/2007-2012/2013). One practice was excluded as it served a restricted practice list. MEASUREMENTS: Estimates of smoking prevalence in general practice populations and among patients with chronic conditions.

resultsMedian smoking prevalence in the practice populations for 2012/2013 was 19.2% (range 5.8-43.0%). There was good agreement (mean difference: 0.39%; 95% limits of agreement (-3.77, 4.55)) between IHS estimates for local authority districts and aggregated QOF register estimates. Smoking prevalence estimates in those with chronic conditions were lower than for the general population (mean difference -3.05%), but strongly correlated (Rp=0.74, p<0.0001). An important positive association between premature CHD mortality and smoking prevalence was shown when smoking prevalence was added to other population and service characteristics.

conclusionsPublished QOF data allow useful estimation of smoking prevalence within practice populations and in those with chronic conditions; the latter estimates may sometimes be useful in place of the former. It may also provide useful estimates of smoking prevalence in local areas by aggregating practice based data.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleGeneral PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CarePrevalenceQuality of Health CareSmokingState MedicineUnited KingdomYoung AdultEpidemiologyPrimary CarePublic HealthStatistics & Research Methods

Identifiers

PMID25031192
PMCPMC4120299

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.