ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2025
Trends in the shortfall of English NHS general practice doctors: repeat cross sectional study.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The general practice workforce crisis in Europe: scale of the challenge and available policy responses.The Lancet. Primary care · 2026Review
- Enabling non-medically qualified registered clinicians in general practice to request chest X-ray for possible lung cancer.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Article
- 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 · 2026Article
- Experiences of access to general practice in England: qualitative study and implications for the NHS 10 year plan.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2026Article
- Jess's Rule: advocating for continuity, ownership, and generalism in general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the numbers and characteristics of English general practitioner doctors (GPs) across publicly available data sources, and to examine trends in GP numbers relative to population growth and the specialist medical workforce in England.
designRepeat cross sectional study.
settingThree national data sources, England, 2012-24: General Medical Council (GMC) GP and specialist registers; NHS England GP Performers List; and NHS England's General Practice Workforce and NHS Workforce Statistics datasets.
participantsAll GMC licensed, fully qualified GPs in England.
main outcome measuresDifferences over time in total numbers and GP characteristics. Changes in the difference between GMC and NHS general practice GP numbers and characteristics, and analysis of trends relative to population size and equivalent data on specialist doctors.
resultsAs of 31 December 2024, 58 548 GPs were listed on the GMC GP register, 55 958 on the Performers List, but only 38 626 by headcount and 28 197 by full time equivalent GPs in NHS general practice. Between 2015 and 2024, on average, for every five additional GPs licensed by the GMC, NHS general practice lost one full time equivalent GP each year. As a result, the proportion of GMC licensed GPs not working in NHS general practice increased from 27% (13 492) in 2015 to 34% (19 922) in 2024 by headcount and from 41% (20 210) to 52% (30 351) by full time equivalent GPs. Differences were greatest among female GPs, younger GPs, UK qualified GPs, and GPs in London and the South East of England. In contrast, between 2015 and 2024, for every five additional GMC licensed specialist doctors, the NHS gained 4.3 full time equivalent consultants. Taking population growth into account, the number of NHS patients for each full time equivalent GP in NHS general practice increased by15%, whereas the number of patients for each full time equivalent NHS consultant fell by 18%. By the end of 2024, there were twice as many NHS patients for each full time equivalent NHS general practice GP (2260) than for each full time equivalent NHS consultant (1092).
conclusionThe growing difference between GMC licensed GPs and those working in NHS general practice is in contrast with trends among specialists. This shift is occurring despite rising patient demand and policy commitments to strengthen primary care. Addressing the underlying reasons for workforce attrition in NHS general practice is critical to achieving the government's stated goals of strengthening community based care and shifting the focus of care from treatment to prevention.
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.