Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 158

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Why has antibiotic prescribing for respiratory illness declined in primary care? A longitudinal study using the General Practice Research Database

Open access
Ashworth, M., Cox, K., Latinovic, R., Charlton, J., Gulliford, M., Rowlands, G.·2004·Journal of Public Health

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic prescribing by general practitioners (GPs) increased in the 1980s and peaked in 1995. Prescribing volumes subsequently fell by over a quarter between 1995 and 2000, mostly accounted for by reduced antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory illnesses. We aimed to investigate changes in consultation rates and the proportion of consultations with antibiotics prescribed for different types of respiratory tract infections. METHODS: Data were derived from 108 UK general practices, covering a mean of 642,685 patients, reporting data to the General Practice Research Database (GPRD) continuously between 1994 and 2000. OUTCOME MEASURES: annual age- and sex-standardized consultation rates for 11 different acute respiratory infections per 1000 registered patients and proportions of these consultations resulting in an antibiotic prescription. RESULTS: The standardized consultation rate for 'any respiratory infection' declined by 35 per cent from 422 to 273 per 1000 registered patients, per year. The largest relative reductions in consultation rates were observed for 'common cold' (50 per cent), 'laryngitis' (43 per cent) and 'sore throat' (43 per cent). The standardized proportion of consultations that resulted in an antibiotic prescription for 'any respiratory infection' declined from 79 per cent in 1994 to 67 per cent in 2000. The largest relative reductions in antibiotic prescribing rates occurred in patients recorded as suffering from 'influenza' (52 per cent), 'upper respiratory tract infections' (33 per cent) and 'laryngitis' (30 per cent). Overall, antibiotic prescriptions for all acute respiratory infections declined by 45 per cent. CONCLUSION: The reduction in antibiotic prescribing in common respiratory infections between 1994 and 2000 has occurred partly because GPs are prescribing antibiotics less frequently when patients consult but mainly because there are fewer consultations with these conditions. Further work should aim to understand the reasons for the decline in consultations for respiratory infections and whether further reductions in antibiotic prescribing are feasible.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/pubmed/fdh160

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 158

Metadata

Authors
Ashworth, M., Cox, K., Latinovic, R., Charlton, J., Gulliford, M., & Rowlands, G.
Venue
Journal of Public Health
Published
2004-09-01
Volume
26
Issue
3
Pages
268-274
ISSN
  • 0943-1853 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-3842
  • 1741-3850
OpenAlex
W2114669069
Cited by
158
References
0
FWCI
10.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Why has antibiotic prescribing for respiratory illness declined in primary care? A longitudinal study using the General Practice Research Database. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/pubmed/fdh160
The paper
Ashworth, M., Cox, K., Latinovic, R., Charlton, J., Gulliford, M., & Rowlands, G. (2004). Why has antibiotic prescribing for respiratory illness declined in primary care? A longitudinal study using the General Practice Research Database. Journal of Public Health. https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdh160

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.