Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39658076›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2025

Prevalence and patterns of testing for anaemia in primary care in England: a cohort study using an electronic health records database.

Margaret Smith, Cynthia Wright Drakesmith, Sarah Haynes, Suzanne Maynard, Akshay Shah, Noemi Ba Roy, Joseph Jonathan Lee, Katja Maurer, Simon J Stanworth, Clare R Bankhead

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

10 authors.

Margaret SmithNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.ORCID 0000-0002-0946-742X
Cynthia Wright DrakesmithNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.ORCID 0000-0002-7196-1509
Sarah HaynesJohn Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford.ORCID 0009-0004-8605-6263
Suzanne MaynardRadcliffe Department of Medicine, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford.ORCID 0000-0003-3039-2562
Akshay ShahNuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences and NIHR Blood and Transplant Research Unit in Data Driven Transfusion Practice, Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford.ORCID 0000-0002-1869-2231
Noemi Ba RoyDepartment of Haematology, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, and Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford.ORCID 0000-0002-0919-0790
Joseph Jonathan LeeNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.ORCID 0000-0002-4033-0915
Katja MaurerNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.
Simon J StanworthNIHR Blood and Transplant Research Unit in Data Driven Transfusion Practice, Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford; consultant haematologist, Department of Haematology/Transfusion Medicine, NHS Blood and Transplant, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, and Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford.ORCID 0000-0002-7414-4950
Clare R BankheadNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.ORCID 0000-0003-1588-3849

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite epidemiological data on anaemia being available on a global scale, the prevalence of anaemia in the UK is not well described.

aimTo describe anaemia prevalence and testing patterns for haemoglobin and other blood parameters. DESIGN AND

settingThis study was a descriptive population-based cohort study using data drawn from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum database in 2019.

methodDemographic data were extracted for each person who was registered at their current practice during 2019, including linked data on Index of Multiple Deprivation. Anaemia prevalence in 2019 was calculated based on World Health Organization-specified age and gender thresholds for haemoglobin. Anaemia was classified based on mean corpuscular volume and ferritin. People with anaemia were followed up for up to 1 year to investigate longitudinal testing patterns for haemoglobin.

resultsThe cohort contained 14 million people. Anaemia prevalence in England in 2019 was 4.1% (583 847/14 207 841) (5.1% [363 438/7 121 614] females and 3.1% [220 409/7 086 227] males). Prevalence was higher in people aged >65 years, people of Black and Asian ethnicities, and people living in areas with higher social deprivation. Only half of people with anaemia and a mean corpuscular volume of ≤100 fL had an accompanying ferritin value recorded. About half of people with anaemia had a follow-up haemoglobin test within 1 year, most of which still indicated anaemia.

conclusionAnaemia is prevalent in the UK with large disparities between levels of demographic variables. Investigation and follow-up of anaemia is suboptimal in many patients. Health interventions aimed at improving anaemia investigation and treatment are needed, particularly in the most at-risk groups.

Indexed as

AnemiaPrimary Health CareAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildCohort StudiesDatabases, FactualElectronic Health RecordsEnglandErythrocyte IndicesFemaleFerritinsHemoglobinsHumansFerritinsHemoglobinsanaemiaepidemiologyferritinshaemoglobinmean corpuscular volumeprimary health care

Identifiers

PMID39658076
PMCPMC11881008

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.