Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Research Methods

The accuracy of age—sex registers, practice medical records and family practitioner committee registers

Robin C. Fraser and David G. Clayton
The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners 1981; 31 (228): 410-419.
Robin C. Fraser
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David G. Clayton
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a point prevalent evaluation of the comparative reliability and validity of age-sex registers, practice medical records and family practitioner committee (FPC) registers from five teaching practices. They all exhibited similar levels of acceptable accuracy for patient names, sex and age, but the distribution of wrong addresses varied greatly: practice medical records 3·9 per cent, age-sex registers 8·2 per cent and FPC registers 17·1 per cent. The presence of a patient entry in all three registers was associated with a high degree of probability (95·3 per cent) that this individual would be a bona fide practice patient. The register population inflation rates were FPC records 5·5 per cent, practice records 9·8 per cent and age-sex registers 10·6 per cent, but there were large variations between individual practices. A statistically significant contribution to inflation rates came from the age groups 0 to 1 and 21 to 40 (p<0·0005). The register population deflation rates were minimal. The significance of these findings is discussed and the need for practices to determine the accuracy of their individual age-sex registers is stressed. A convenient and economic method for so doing is suggested. We also suggest ways of making it easier to construct and use age-sex registers, since they can be a most versatile and useful aid to research in general practice.

  • © Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners: 31 (228)
The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners
Vol. 31, Issue 228
July 1981
  • Table of Contents
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Advertising (PDF)
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The accuracy of age—sex registers, practice medical records and family practitioner committee registers
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
The accuracy of age—sex registers, practice medical records and family practitioner committee registers
Robin C. Fraser, David G. Clayton
The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners 1981; 31 (228): 410-419.

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
The accuracy of age—sex registers, practice medical records and family practitioner committee registers
Robin C. Fraser, David G. Clayton
The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners 1981; 31 (228): 410-419.
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Accuracy of the patient identifier in a family practice data system
  • Multipractice studies: how representative are the participating doctors?
Show more Research Methods

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2022 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242