Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • BJGP Blog
    • eLetters
    • Feedback
    • Librarian information
    • Alerts
    • Resilience
    • Video
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
    • RCGP e-Portfolio

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Log out

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
    • RCGP e-Portfolio
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
Advertisement
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • BJGP Blog
    • eLetters
    • Feedback
    • Librarian information
    • Alerts
    • Resilience
    • Video
Research Article

A comparison of individual and population smoking data from a postal survey and general practice records.

A Wilson, T Manku-Scott, D Shepherd and B Jones
British Journal of General Practice 2000; 50 (455): 465-468.
A Wilson
Department of General Practice and Primary Health Care, University of Leicester. aw7@le.ac.uk
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
T Manku-Scott
Department of General Practice and Primary Health Care, University of Leicester. aw7@le.ac.uk
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
D Shepherd
Department of General Practice and Primary Health Care, University of Leicester. aw7@le.ac.uk
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
B Jones
Department of General Practice and Primary Health Care, University of Leicester. aw7@le.ac.uk
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Data on smoking held by general practitioners (GPs) may contribute to clinical care and to an assessment of population health. However, these data are prone to several biases and their validity has not been tested. AIM: To examine the accuracy of general practice data as an estimate for population prevalence of smoking and to estimate the accuracy of GP data on individuals' smoking habit compared with self-report. METHODS: A postal questionnaire on smoking habit over the past six years was sent to a random sample of individuals aged 15 to 74 years and registered with five out of seven general practices in one part of Leicester. GP records of those sampled were examined for an entry of smoking status over this period. RESULTS: Response rate to the postal questionnaire was 1906 out of 2490 (76.5%). Reported smoking prevalence was 35.2%. Of those notes sampled, 1784 out of 2432 (73.4%) had an entry about smoking recorded between 1991 and 1996. Patients recorded as smokers were less likely to respond to the postal questionnaire than non-smokers. Using practice data to ascribe smoking status to non-responders produced an estimated prevalence of 38.6%. Using questionnaire data alone as the 'gold standard', the last practice record collected since 1991 overestimated current smoking prevalence by a factor of 1.22; using questionnaire data supplemented by practice data for non-responders as the 'gold standard' meant that the overestimate was by a factor of 1.11. Data from notes and the questionnaire were available for 1398 individuals and 2188 observations. Levels of agreement were high (kappa = 0.83). CONCLUSION: GP-held data are valid for individuals but over-estimate smoking prevalence at a population level.

Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 50 (455)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 50, Issue 455
June 2000
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
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.
A comparison of individual and population smoking data from a postal survey and general practice records.
(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.
Citation Tools
A comparison of individual and population smoking data from a postal survey and general practice records.
A Wilson, T Manku-Scott, D Shepherd, B Jones
British Journal of General Practice 2000; 50 (455): 465-468.

Citation Manager Formats

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

Share
A comparison of individual and population smoking data from a postal survey and general practice records.
A Wilson, T Manku-Scott, D Shepherd, B Jones
British Journal of General Practice 2000; 50 (455): 465-468.
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

  • Exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial of shared care development for long-term mental illness.
  • Integrated primary mental health care: threat or opportunity in the new NHS?
  • "The cawing of the crow...Cassandra-like, prognosticating woe".
Show more Research Article

Related Articles

Cited By...

Advertisement

 

Register Now for the BJGP Research Conference, 12 March 2020

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
  • RCGP e-Portfolio

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 Blog
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7679
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2019 British Journal of General Practice

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