↓ Skip to main content

The epidemiology of multimorbidity in primary care: a retrospective cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#43 of 3,410)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
10 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
135 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
255 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The epidemiology of multimorbidity in primary care: a retrospective cohort study
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, March 2018
DOI 10.3399/bjgp18x695465
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anna Cassell, Duncan Edwards, Amelia Harshfield, Kirsty Rhodes, James Brimicombe, Rupert Payne, Simon Griffin

Abstract

Multimorbidity places a substantial burden on patients and the healthcare system, but few contemporary epidemiological data are available. To describe the epidemiology of multimorbidity in adults in England, and quantify associations between multimorbidity and health service utilisation. Retrospective cohort study, undertaken in England. The study used a random sample of 403 985 adult patients (aged ≥18 years), who were registered with a general practice on 1 January 2012 and included in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Multimorbidity was defined as having two or more of 36 long-term conditions recorded in patients' medical records, and associations between multimorbidity and health service utilisation (GP consultations, prescriptions, and hospitalisations) over 4 years were quantified. In total, 27.2% of the patients involved in the study had multimorbidity. The most prevalent conditions were hypertension (18.2%), depression or anxiety (10.3%), and chronic pain (10.1%). The prevalence of multimorbidity was higher in females than males (30.0% versus 24.4% respectively) and among those with lower socioeconomic status (30.0% in the quintile with the greatest levels of deprivation versus 25.8% in that with the lowest). Physical-mental comorbidity constituted a much greater proportion of overall morbidity in both younger patients (18-44 years) and those patients with a lower socioeconomic status. Multimorbidity was strongly associated with health service utilisation. Patients with multimorbidity accounted for 52.9% of GP consultations, 78.7% of prescriptions, and 56.1% of hospital admissions. Multimorbidity is common, socially patterned, and associated with increased health service utilisation. These findings support the need to improve the quality and efficiency of health services providing care to patients with multimorbidity at both practice and national level.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 135 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 255 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 <1%
India 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 250 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 43 17%
Student > Master 41 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 14%
Student > Bachelor 33 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 5%
Other 43 17%
Unknown 48 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 96 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 33 13%
Social Sciences 12 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 4%
Other 28 11%
Unknown 66 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 175. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 March 2020.
All research outputs
#108,772
of 15,892,757 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#43
of 3,410 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,131
of 281,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#4
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,892,757 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,410 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 281,026 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.