ArticleBJGP open2026
Between-practice variation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease diagnosis guideline compliance: an observational study.
Article in BJGP open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) diagnosis is vital, but little is known about compliance with relevant diagnostic guidelines or variation in primary care.
aimTo quantify between-practice variations in guideline compliance and over time. DESIGN &
settingAn observational study in English primary care.
methodThe Clinical Practice Research Datalink was used to assess the use of four pre-diagnostic investigations (spirometry, chest X-ray, full blood count [FBC], and body mass index [BMI]) by GP practices for patients with COPD recorded first in primary care, in three time periods: 2006-2007 (cohort 1), 2016-2017 (cohort 2), and March-August 2020 (cohort 3). Multilevel logistic regression models quantified the non-random variation between GP practices in spirometry around diagnosis. Funnel plots counted the proportion of outliers.
resultsCohort totals were 31 676 (cohort 1), 37 393 (cohort 2), and 3368 (cohort 3). Overall, the mean age was 68.3 years (standard deviation 12.0), with 46.1% female. The use of pre-diagnosis spirometry improved a little in cohort 2 (74.2%) on cohort 1 (62.8%) but fell back for the COVID-19-era group (61.1%). In contrast, chest X-ray, FBC, and BMI all improved after cohort 1 and were maintained for the COVID-19 cohort; almost all patients received one of these investigations. The proportion receiving all four investigations before diagnosis jumped from 26.6% in cohort 1 to 46.7% in cohort 2 and was maintained in cohort 3 (43.0%). Modelling and funnel plots showed considerable non-random variation in spirometry use by practice, although with some improvement since cohort 1.
conclusionThe recording of spirometry and chest X-rays warrants further and consistent improvement in the context of COPD 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.