Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35747176›Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2022

What factors influence differential uptake of NHS Health Checks, diabetes and hypertension reviews among women in ethnically diverse South London? Cross-sectional analysis of 63,000 primary care records.

Mariam Molokhia, Dr Salma Ayis, Alexis Karamanos, Dr Veline L'Esperance, Sarah Yousif, Stevo Durbaba, Vasa Ćurčin, Mark Ashworth, Seeromanie Harding

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Tirzepatide and the NHS: are we creating a two-tier obesity treatment system?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Mariam MolokhiaSchool of Life Course & Population Sciences, King's College London, UK.
Dr Salma AyisSchool of Life Course & Population Sciences, King's College London, UK.
Alexis KaramanosSchool of Life Course & Population Sciences, King's College London, UK.
Dr Veline L'EsperanceSchool of Life Course & Population Sciences, King's College London, UK.
Sarah YousifSchool of Life Course & Population Sciences, King's College London, UK.
Stevo DurbabaSchool of Life Course & Population Sciences, King's College London, UK.
Vasa ĆurčinSchool of Life Course & Population Sciences, King's College London, UK.
Mark AshworthSchool of Life Course & Population Sciences, King's College London, UK.
Seeromanie HardingSchool of Life Course & Population Sciences, King's College London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Uptake of health checks among women has not been examined in relation to patient and General Practitioner (GP) practice level factors. We investigated patient and practice level factors associated with differential uptake of health checks. Methods: Primary care records from 44 practices in Lambeth for women aged 40-74 years old ( Findings: The mean age (IQR) of the included female sample (aged 40-74 years) was 52.9 years (45.0-59.0). Adjusted for patient-level factors (age, ethnicity, English as first language, overweight/obesity, smoking, attendance to GP practices, and co-morbidity), the odds of non-uptake of health checks were higher for Other White (OR 1.24, 95% confidence interval 1.17-1.33), and Other ethnicity (1.20, 1.07-1.35) vs. White British. It was also higher for 50-69 year olds (1.55, 1.47-1.62), 70-74 year olds (1.60, 1.49-1.72) vs. 40-49 year olds. These ORs did not change on adjustments for practice level factors (proportion of patients living in deprived areas, proportion of patients with ≥1 chronic condition, ≥3 emergency diabetes admissions annually, GP density/1000 patients, quality outcome framework score of ≥ 95%, and patient satisfaction scores of ≥80%). Non-uptake was lower for Black Caribbeans, Bangladeshis, overweight/obese patients, frequent practice attenders and comorbid patients. Interpretation: Differential uptake in health checks remained after adjustment for patient and practice level factors. Better measures of social determinants of health and of practice context are needed. Funding: NIHR Research for Patient Benefit Programme (NIHR202769).

Indexed as

Contextual factorsEthnicityHealth checkInequalitiesSocial determinants

Identifiers

PMID35747176
PMCPMC9156982

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.