• We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
Logo of brjgenpracRCGP homepageJ R Coll Gen Pract at PubMed CentralBJGP at RCGPBJGP at RCGP
Br J Gen Pract. Jun 2002; 52(479): 463–468.
PMCID: PMC1314321

A comparison of research general practices and their patients with other practices--a cross-sectional survey in Trent.


BACKGROUND: When interpreting results of studies undertaken by research networks we need to know how representative volunteer practices and their registered patients are of the total population of practices and patients in their locality. AIM: To compare the following in research and non-research general practices in one region: practice and population demography, morbidity and mortality, selected performance indicators, and health outcomes. DESIGN OF STUDY: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Sixty-six Trent Focus Collaborative Research Network general practices and 749 other general practices in Trent, United Kingdom. METHOD: Practice characteristics and GP contract data were obtained from the NHS Executive, Quarry House, Leeds. The Trent Regional NHS Hospital Admission Database was searched to identify all relevant admissions to hospital from all practices between 1 April 1993 and 31 March 1997. Ward-linked data on cancer were obtained from the Trent Cancer Registry. RESULTS: Of the 815 general practices in Trent Region in the study period, 66 (8%) were in the Trent Focus network. They were more likely to be involved in training GPs and to have a female partner. They tended to be larger, with fewer single-handed doctors and younger GPs. Network practices prescribed a higher proportion of generics (median % prescribed/practice = 70%, versus 51%, Mann-Whitney U = 1615, P<0.0001). There were no clinically important differences between hospital admission rates between the two groups or waiting times for surgical procedures. There was no difference in the incidence of cancer and standardised mortality ratios related to the electoral wards of the GP surgery. CONCLUSION: Although there were differences in practice structure and some aspects of performance, we found no important differences in the demography of registered patients, nor in morbidity, mortality, or access to or use of secondary care.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (188K).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Griffiths F, Wild A, Harvey J, Fenton E. The productivity of primary care research networks. Br J Gen Pract. 2000 Nov;50(460):913–915. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Driver B, Britt H, O'Toole B, Harris M, Bridges-Webb C, Neary S. How representative are patients in general practice morbidity surveys? Fam Pract. 1991 Sep;8(3):261–268. [PubMed]
  • Green LA, Miller RS, Reed FM, Iverson DC, Barley GE. How representative of typical practice are practice-based research networks? A report from the Ambulatory Sentinel Practice Network Inc (ASPN) Arch Fam Med. 1993 Sep;2(9):939–949. [PubMed]
  • Smith LF. Research general practices: what, who and why? Br J Gen Pract. 1997 Feb;47(415):83–86. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Tilyard MW, Dovey SM, Spears GF. Biases in estimates from the RNZCGP computer research group. N Z Med J. 1995 Apr 12;108(997):118–121. [PubMed]
  • Giuffrida A, Gravelle H, Roland M. Measuring quality of care with routine data: avoiding confusion between performance indicators and health outcomes. BMJ. 1999 Jul 10;319(7202):94–98. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Hippisley-Cox J, Allen J, Pringle M, Ebdon D, McPhearson M, Churchill D, Bradley S. Association between teenage pregnancy rates and the age and sex of general practitioners: cross sectional survey in Trent 1994-7. BMJ. 2000 Mar 25;320(7238):842–845. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Morris R, Carstairs V. Which deprivation? A comparison of selected deprivation indexes. J Public Health Med. 1991 Nov;13(4):318–326. [PubMed]
  • Roland M, Marshall M. General practice in an age of measurement. Br J Gen Pract. 2001 Aug;51(469):611–612. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

Articles from The British Journal of General Practice are provided here courtesy of Royal College of General Practitioners


Related citations in PubMed

See reviews...See all...

Cited by other articles in PMC

See all...


  • PubMed
    PubMed citations for these articles

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...