• We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
Logo of thoraxThoraxInstructions for authorsInstructions for authors
Thorax. May 1999; 54(5): 413–419.
PMCID: PMC1763769

Use of the General Practice Research Database (GPRD) for respiratory epidemiology: a comparison with the 4th Morbidity Survey in General Practice (MSGP4)

Abstract

BACKGROUND—The General Practice Research Database (GPRD) covers over 6% of the population of England and Wales and holds data on diagnoses and prescribing from 1987 onwards. Most previous studies using the GPRD have concentrated on drug use and safety. A study was undertaken to assess the validity of using the GPRD for epidemiological research into respiratory diseases.
METHODS—Age-specific and sex-specific rates derived from the GPRD for 11 respiratory conditions were compared with patient consultation rates from the 4th Morbidity Survey in General Practice (MSGP4). Within the GPRD comparisons were made between patient diagnosis rates, patient prescription rates, and patient "prescription plus relevant diagnosis" rates for selected treatments.
RESULTS—There was good agreement between consultation rates in the MSGP4 and diagnosis or "prescription plus diagnosis" from the GPRD in terms of pattern and magnitude, except for "acute bronchitis or bronchiolitis" where the best comparison was the combination category of "chest infection" and/or "acute bronchitis or bronchiolitis". Within the GPRD, patient prescription rates for inhalers, tuberculosis or hayfever therapy showed little similarity with diagnosis only rates but a similarity was seen with the combination of "prescription plus diagnosis" which may be a better reflection of morbidity than diagnosis alone.
CONCLUSIONS—The GPRD appears to be valid for primary care epidemiological studies by comparison with MSGP4 and offers advantages in terms of large size, a longer time period covered, and ability to link prescriptions with diagnoses. However, careful interpretation is needed because not all consultations are recorded and the coding system used contains terms which do not directly map to ICD codes.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (122K).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Purves IN. The paperless general practice. BMJ. 1996 May 4;312(7039):1112–1113. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Whitelaw FG, Nevin SL, Milne RM, Taylor RJ, Taylor MW, Watt AH. Completeness and accuracy of morbidity and repeat prescribing records held on general practice computers in Scotland. Br J Gen Pract. 1996 Mar;46(404):181–186. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Jick H. A database worth saving. Lancet. 1997 Oct 11;350(9084):1045–1046. [PubMed]
  • McCormick A, Charlton J, Fleming D. Assessing health needs in primary care. Morbidity study from general practice provides another source of information. BMJ. 1995 Jun 10;310(6993):1534–1534. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Jick H, Jick SS, Derby LE. Validation of information recorded on general practitioner based computerised data resource in the United Kingdom. BMJ. 1991 Mar 30;302(6779):766–768. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Nazareth I, King M, Haines A, Rangel L, Myers S. Accuracy of diagnosis of psychosis on general practice computer system. BMJ. 1993 Jul 3;307(6895):32–34. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Turnbull S, Ward A, Treasure J, Jick H, Derby L. The demand for eating disorder care. An epidemiological study using the general practice research database. Br J Psychiatry. 1996 Dec;169(6):705–712. [PubMed]
  • Lis Y, Mann RD. The VAMP Research multi-purpose database in the U.K. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995 Mar;48(3):431–443. [PubMed]
  • Hollowell J. The General Practice Research Database: quality of morbidity data. Popul Trends. 1997 Spring;(87):36–40. [PubMed]
  • Ross AM, Fleming DM. Incidence of allergic rhinitis in general practice, 1981-92. BMJ. 1994 Apr 2;308(6933):897–900. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Shelley M, Croft P, Chapman S, Pantin C. Is the ratio of inhaled corticosteroid to bronchodilator a good indicator of the quality of asthma prescribing? Cross sectional study linking prescribing data to data on admissions. BMJ. 1996 Nov 2;313(7065):1124–1126. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

Articles from Thorax are provided here courtesy of BMJ Group

Formats:

Related citations in PubMed

See reviews...See all...

Cited by other articles in PMC

See all...

Links

  • Cited in Books
    Cited in Books
    PubMed Central articles cited in books
  • MedGen
    MedGen
    Related information in MedGen
  • PubMed
    PubMed
    PubMed citations for these articles