Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27993900›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2017

RCGP Research and Surveillance Centre Annual Report 2014-2015: disparities in presentations to primary care.

Simon de Lusignan, Ana Correa, Sameera Pathirannehelage, Rachel Byford, Ivelina Yonova, Alex J Elliot, Theresa Lamagni, Gayatri Amirthalingam, Richard Pebody, Gillian Smith and 2 more

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Saving bones without risking brain-bisphosphonates and risk of stroke: matched case-control study.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2019
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Simon de LusignanRCGP Research and Surveillance Centre.
Ana CorreaDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Surrey and RCGP Research and Surveillance Centre, Guildford.
Sameera PathirannehelageDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Surrey and RCGP Research and Surveillance Centre, Guildford.
Rachel ByfordDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Surrey, Guildford.
Ivelina YonovaDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Surrey and RCGP Research and Surveillance Centre, Guildford.
Alex J ElliotReal-time Syndromic Surveillance Team.
Theresa LamagniHealthcare-Associated Infection and Antimicrobial Resistance Department.
Gayatri AmirthalingamImmunisation, Hepatitis and Blood Safety.
Richard PebodyRespiratory Surveillance Department, National Infection Service, Public Health England, London.
Gillian SmithReal-time Syndromic Surveillance Team.
Simon JonesDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Surrey and Department of Population Health, New York University, New York.
Imran RafiClinical Innovation and Research Centre, RCGP, London.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC) comprises over 100 general practices in England, with a population of around 1 million, providing a public health surveillance system for England and data for research.

aimTo demonstrate the scope of data with the RCGP Annual Report 2014-2015 (May 2014 to April 2015) by describing disparities in the presentation of six common conditions included in the report. DESIGN AND

settingThis is a report of respiratory and communicable disease incidence from a primary care sentinel network in England.

methodIncidence rates and demographic profiles are described for common cold, acute otitis media, pneumonia, influenza-like illness, herpes zoster, and scarlet fever. The impact of age, sex, ethnicity, and deprivation on the diagnosis of each condition is explored using a multivariate logistic regression.

resultsWith the exception of herpes zoster, all conditions followed a seasonal pattern. Apart from pneumonia and scarlet fever, the odds of presenting with any of the selected conditions were greater for females (P<0.001). Older people had a greater probability of a pneumonia diagnosis (≥75 years, odds ratio [OR] 6.37; P<0.001). Common cold and influenza-like illness were more likely in people from ethnic minorities than white people, while the converse was true for acute otitis media and herpes zoster. There were higher odds of acute otitis media and herpes zoster diagnosis among the less deprived (least deprived quintile, OR 1.32 and 1.48, respectively; P<0.001).

conclusionThe RCGP RSC database provides insight into the content and range of GP workload and provides insight into current public health concerns. Further research is needed to explore these disparities in presentation to primary care.

Indexed as

Patient Acceptance of Health CarePrimary Health CareAdolescentAdultAgedAsian PeopleBlack PeopleChildChild, PreschoolCommon ColdEnglandEpidemiological MonitoringEthnicityFemaleGeneral PracticeHealthcare Disparitiescommon coldgeneral practiceherpes zosterhuman influenzamedical records systems, computerisedotitis mediapneumoniascarlet fever

Identifiers

PMID27993900
PMCPMC5198624

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.