Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37497381›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2023

Prevalence of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in England from 2000 to 2019.

Philip W Stone, Michael Osen, Andrew Ellis, Rebecca Coaker, Jennifer K Quint

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Vitamin D for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Review
  9. Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events and Cause-Specific Mortality After Hospitalisation in COPD.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
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

5 authors.

Philip W StoneNational Heart and Lung Institute/School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2326-4987
Michael OsenTaskforce for Lung Health, London, UK.
Andrew EllisTaskforce for Lung Health, London, UK.
Rebecca CoakerTaskforce for Lung Health, London, UK.
Jennifer K QuintNational Heart and Lung Institute/School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0149-4869

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: There is considerable variation in reported chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) prevalence internationally, partly due to differing definitions in use. Accurate estimates of disease prevalence are important for allocation of health-care resources, yet UK estimates of COPD prevalence have not been updated for a decade. We calculated yearly COPD prevalence in England between 2000 and 2019 using different definitions of COPD. Methods: We used routinely collected primary care electronic healthcare record (EHR) data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum database linked with secondary care data from the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) Admitted Patient Care (APC) database. Mid-year point prevalence was calculated yearly from 2000 to 2019 in English adults aged ≥40 years using 5 definitions: (i) validated COPD, (ii) Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) COPD, (iii) COPD symptoms, inhaler prescription, and no asthma diagnosis, (iv) hospitalisation with COPD as any diagnosis, (v) hospitalisation with COPD as primary or secondary diagnosis. Prevalence was further stratified by gender, age group, and region. Results: A total of 12,745,793 people were included over the 20-year period. Annual cohort sizes ranged from 4,373,538 in 2000 to 6,159,496 in 2019. Estimates of COPD prevalence increased every year from 2000 and the difference in estimated prevalence between the validated and QOF definitions has grown over time. In 2019, a COPD prevalence of 4.9% was found using validated events in either primary or secondary care (definition 1 or definition 5). Additionally, including potentially undiagnosed cases (definition 3) in the COPD definition produced an increased prevalence of 6.7%. Conclusion: Common definitions of COPD (eg, QOF codes), may underestimate the true prevalence. The extent of this underestimate has increased over time and could lead to under-allocation of resources where need is estimated based on these definitions. Standardisation of COPD coding in routine EHRs and metrics such as spirometry is key to accurate disease monitoring.

Indexed as

AsthmaPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveAdultEnglandHospitalsHumansPrevalencechronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseclinical practice research datalinkCOPDCPRDEnglandprevalence

Identifiers

PMID37497381
PMCPMC10368107

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.