Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37230775›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2023

Consequences of the closure of general practices: a retrospective cross-sectional study.

Joseph Hutchinson, Kath Checkland, Jon Gibson, Evangelos Kontopantelis, Matt Sutton

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Adoption of clinical pharmacist roles in primary care: longitudinal evidence from English general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  2. Impact of changes in primary care attachment: a scoping review.Family medicine and community health · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Sustaining existing general practices while building for the future.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Joseph HutchinsonCentre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, University of Manchester, Manchester.ORCID 0000-0001-8964-0984
Kath ChecklandCentre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, University of Manchester, Manchester.ORCID 0000-0002-9961-5317
Jon GibsonCentre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, University of Manchester, Manchester.ORCID 0000-0003-4177-8049
Evangelos KontopantelisCentre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, University of Manchester, Manchester.ORCID 0000-0001-6450-5815
Matt SuttonCentre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, University of Manchester, Manchester.ORCID 0000-0002-6635-2127
Manchester Academic Health Science Centre · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTwo general practices close every week in the UK. Given the pressure on UK general practices, such closures are likely to persist. Yet little is known about the consequences. Closure refers to when a practice ceases to exist, merges, or is taken over.

aimTo explore whether practice funding, list size, workforce composition, and quality change in surviving practices when surrounding general practices close. DESIGN AND

settingA cross-sectional study of English general practices was undertaken, using data from 2016-2020.

methodThe exposure to closure for all practices existing on 31 March 2020 was estimated. This is the estimation proportion of a practice's patient list that had been through a closure in the preceding 3 years, between 1 April 2016 and 3 March 2019. The interaction between the exposure to closure estimate and the outcome variables (list size, funding, workforce, and quality) was analysed through multiple linear regression, while controlling for confounders (age profile, deprivation, ethnic group, and rurality).

resultsA total of 694 (8.41%) practices closed. A 10% increase in exposure to closure resulted in 1925.6 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1675.8 to 2175.4) more patients in the practice with £2.37 (95% CI = £4.22 to £0.51) less funding per patient. While numbers of all staff types increased, there were 86.9 (95% CI = 50.5 to 123.3), 4.3%, more patients per GP. Increases for other staff types were proportionate to increases in patients. Patient satisfaction with services declined across all domains. No significant difference in Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) scores was identified.

conclusionHigher exposure to closure led to larger practice sizes in remaining practices. Closure of practices changes workforce composition and reduces patient satisfaction with services.

Indexed as

General PracticeCross-Sectional StudiesHumansPatient SatisfactionRetrospective StudiesWorkforcegeneral practicehealth services researchprimary health carequality of health careworkforce

Identifiers

PMID37230775
PMCPMC10227999
OpenAlexW4323546161

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.