ArticleJournal of epidemiology and community health1995
Can general practice provide useful information?--evaluation of a primary health care information project in northern England.
Article in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 1995. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- A survey of validity and utility of electronic patient records in a general practice.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2001Article
- Continuing educational needs in computers and informatics. McGill survey of family physicians.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2000Article
- Health services information and health services research from the British Isles to Europe to Asia, over 40 years.Journal of epidemiology and community health · 1996Article
- Collecting morbidity data in general practice: the Somerset morbidity project.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1996Article
- The capture of socioeconomic data in general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1996Article
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
objectiveTo develop a computerised primary care information gathering network capable of producing reliable risk factor and morbidity data from a wide diversity of general practice software systems.
methodFourteen practices from the Wakefield and Pontefract district collaborated in sharing information and solving technical difficulties associated with collecting data on coronary heart disease (CHD) risk factors, diabetes, and asthma. Practices also participated in rheumatology and mental health needs assessment projects.
resultsData could be transferred by diskette in only five of the systems and paper reports had to be used to post process the data into a standard format. Not all data were complete or comparable. Crude estimates only of smoking prevalence and smoking cessation interventions were possible, as well as of age and sex specific prevalences for asthma and diabetes. The rheumatology health needs assessment, using the prospective collection of consultation based data, highlighted an unmet need for rheumatology services in the community.
conclusionsAlthough practices have been willing to devote considerable time and effort to the project, the diversity of software has precluded a simple methodology for data collection and analysis. The amount of useful information retrieved so far, has been limited but a number of important lessons have been learned which have implications for similar information projects and the use of primary care information in service planning.
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.