ArticleBJGP open2018
The evaluation of anaemia in an older primary care population: retrospective population-based study.
Article in BJGP open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Observational
- Prevalence and patterns of testing for anaemia in primary care in England: a cohort study using an electronic health records database.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Article
- Prevalence of anaemia, iron, and vitamin deficiencies in the health system in the Republic of Ireland: a retrospective cohort study.BJGP open · 2024Article
- Causes of Moderate and Severe Anaemia in a High-HIV and TB-Prevalent Adult Population in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Insufficient classification of anaemia in general practice: a Danish register-based observational study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2021Observational
- Article
- Early intravenous iron administration in the Emergency Department reduces red blood cell unit transfusion, hospitalisation, re-transfusion, length of stay and costs.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnaemia is common in older people and the identification of potentially reversible haematinic deficiencies relies on appropriate investigation, often undertaken in primary care.
aimTo determine the laboratory prevalence of anaemia, the types of anaemia observed, and the biochemical and haematological investigations undertaken to characterise any associated haematinic abnormality in older primary care patients. DESIGN &
settingA retrospective primary care based study of patients aged >65 years undergoing a full blood count in Oxfordshire, UK between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2013.
methodConsecutive patients aged >65 years with a full blood count were identified retrospectively from a laboratory database. Patient demographics, number of blood tests and additional laboratory investigations requested were recorded. World Health Organisation (WHO) criteria were used to define anaemia.
resultsIn total 151 473 full blood counts from 53 890 participants were included: 29.6% of patients were anaemic. The majority had a normocytic anaemia (82.4%) and 46.0% of participants with anaemia had no additional investigations performed. The mean haemoglobin was lower in the anaemic group that underwent further investigation than those who did not (Hb 10.68 g/dl versus 11.24 g/dl,
conclusionA large proportion of older adults in primary care with a recent blood test are anaemic, the majority with a normocytic anaemia, with evidence of inadequate investigation. Those with lower haemoglobin are more likely to be further investigated. Further work is needed to understand the approach to anaemia in older adults in primary care.
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.