Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39227175›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2024

The changing shape of English general practice: a retrospective longitudinal study using national datasets describing trends in organisational structure, workforce and recorded appointments.

Luisa M Pettigrew, Irene Petersen, Nicholas Mays, David Cromwell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Counting general practitioners: a comparative repeat cross-sectional analysis of GPs in NHS general practice in England.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  3. Winter pressures in general practice in England.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. From hospital to community? The good, the bad, and the ugly of the 10-year plan to move care to the community.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. CICing the partnership model into the future: a new social enterprise model for general practice?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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.

Luisa M PettigrewDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK luisa.pettigrew@lshtm.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-6427-6696
Irene PetersenResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2446-0506
Nicholas MaysDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9808-8466
David CromwellDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6516-8125

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo describe trends in the organisational structure, workforce and recorded appointments by role in English general practice.

designRetrospective longitudinal study.

settingEnglish general practice. DATA SOURCES AND

participantsNHS England, Office for Health Improvement and Disparities and Care Quality Commission national administrative datasets covering between 5 to 10 years from 2013 to 2023.

resultsBetween 2013 and 2023, the number of general practices fell by 20% from 8044 to 6419; the average practice list size increase by 40% from 6967 to 9724 patients. The total population covered by providers with over 100 000 registered patients reached 2.3 million in 2023 compared to 0.5 million in 2017. The proportion of practices under individual ownership decreased from 13% to 11% between 2018 and 2023; there was little change in the proportion owned by partnerships, incorporated companies or NHS bodies, which respectively averaged around 80.3%, 6.9% and 0.7%. Between 2015 and 2022, there was a 20% rise in the total full-time equivalent (FTE) general practice workforce, including Primary Care Network staff, from 1.97 to 2.37 per 1000 patients because of an increase in multidisciplinary other 'Direct Patient Care' (DPC) and administrative roles. The number of nurses remained stable, and the number of qualified general practitioners (GPs) decreased by 15%. In September 2022, there were 0.45 FTE qualified GPs per 1000 patients; GPs and other DPC roles, excluding nurses, each represented 19% of the FTE per 1000 patients workforce; administrative roles represented 51%. The general practice workforce is predominantly female. A quarter of GPs qualified overseas. Between 2018 and 2023, there was no clear upward or downward trend in total appointments per 1000 patients with, on average, half provided by GPs.

conclusionsSince 2013, there has been a shift in general practice towards larger practices with more multidisciplinary teams, alongside a reduction in the number of FTE qualified GPs per 1000 patients. We recommend that the impacts of these changes on access, quality and costs are closely monitored.

Indexed as

Appointments and SchedulesGeneral PracticeState MedicineEnglandGeneral PractitionersHumansLongitudinal StudiesPrimary Health CareRetrospective Studieshealth policyhealth serviceshealth workforcehuman resource managementprimary health care

Identifiers

PMID39227175
PMCPMC11404227

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.