Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)1995
Effectiveness of health checks conducted by nurses in primary care: final results of the OXCHECK study. Imperial Cancer Research Fund OXCHECK Study Group.
Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 1995. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00461201 (Effectiveness of an Intervention in Primary Care), which is not on this map. Cited by 70 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Effectiveness of an Intervention in Primary Care: Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Care for Patients Requesting Same Day Consultations by Nurse Practitioner vs General Practitioners
Who cites it
70 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of general health checks in adults: A systematic review.BMC public health · 2026Pooled it
- General health checks in adults for reducing morbidity and mortality from disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Nursing interventions for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Exploring equity in primary-care-based physical activity interventions using PROGRESS-Plus: a systematic review and evidence synthesis.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2016Pooled it
- Systematic versus opportunistic risk assessment for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Effectiveness of general practice-based health checks: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2014Pooled it
- General health checks in adults for reducing morbidity and mortality from disease: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2012Pooled it
- Lifestyle interventions in primary care: systematic review of randomized controlled trials.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2008Pooled it
- Does the routine use of global coronary heart disease risk scores translate into clinical benefits or harms? A systematic review of the literature.BMC health services research · 2008Pooled it
- Getting patients to exercise more: a systematic review of underserved populations.The Journal of family practice · 2008Pooled it
- Guidelines for management of hypertension: report of the fourth working party of the British Hypertension Society, 2004-BHS IV.Journal of human hypertension · 2004Guideline
- Dietary advice given by a dietitian versus other health professional or self-help resources to reduce blood cholesterol.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2001Pooled it
- Effects of a Co-Design-Based Invitation Strategy on Participation in a Preventive Health Check Program: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2021Trial
- Cardiovascular risk at health checks performed opportunistically or following an invitation letter. Cohort study.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2018Trial
- The long-term effect of screening and lifestyle counseling on changes in physical activity and diet: the Inter99 Study - a randomized controlled trial.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2015Trial
- Training practitioners to deliver opportunistic multiple behaviour change counselling in primary care: a cluster randomised trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2013Trial
- Effect of screening for Type 2 diabetes on population-level self-rated health outcomes and measures of cardiovascular risk: 13-year follow-up of the Ely cohort.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2012Trial
- Preventing disease through opportunistic, rapid engagement by primary care teams using behaviour change counselling (PRE-EMPT): protocol for a general practice-based cluster randomised trial.BMC family practice · 2010Trial
10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
0 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the effectiveness of health checks, performed by nurses in primary care, in reducing risk factors for cardiovascular disease and cancer.
designRandomised controlled trial.
settingFive urban general practices in Bedfordshire. SUBJECTS: 2205 men and women who were randomly allocated a first health check in 1989-90 and a re-examination in 1992-3 (the intervention group); 1916 men and women who were randomly allocated an initial health check in 1992-3 (the control group). All subjects were aged 35-64 at recruitment in 1989.
main outcome measuresSerum total cholesterol concentration, blood pressure, body mass index, and smoking prevalence (with biochemical validation of cessation); self reported dietary, exercise, and alcohol habits.
resultsMean serum total cholesterol was 3.1% lower in the intervention group than controls (difference 0.19 mmol/l (95% confidence interval 0.12 to 0.26)); in women it was 4.5% lower (P < 0.0001) and in men 1.6% (P < 0.05), a significant difference between the sexes (P < 0.01). Self reported saturated fat intake was also significantly lower in the intervention group. Systolic and diastolic blood pressures and body mass index were respectively 1.9%, 1.9%, and 1.4% lower in the intervention group (P < 0.005 in all cases). There was a 3.9% (2.4 to 5.3) difference in the percentage of subjects with a cholesterol concentration > or = 8 mmol/l, but no significant differences in the number with diastolic blood pressure > or = 100 mm Hg or body mass index > or = 30 kg/m2. There was no significant difference between the two groups in prevalence of smoking or excessive alcohol use. Annual rechecks were no more effective than a single recheck at three years, but health checks led to a significant increase in visits to the nurse according to patients' degree of cardiovascular risk.
conclusionsThe benefits of health checks were sustained over three years. The main effects were to promote dietary change and reduce cholesterol concentrations; small differences in blood pressure may have been attributable to accommodation to measurement. The benefits of systematic health promotion in primary care are real, but must be weighed against the costs in relation to other priorities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
7742676PMC2549499What 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.