Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 557

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Lymphoedema: an underestimated health problem

Open access
Moffatt, C.J., Franks, P.J., Doherty, D.C., Williams, A.F., Badger, C., Jeffs, E., Bosanquet, N., Mortimer, P.S.·2003·QJM

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Lymphoedema/chronic oedema is an important cause of morbidity in the population, but little is known of its epidemiology and impact on patients or health services. AIM: To determine the magnitude of the problem of chronic oedema in the community, and the likely impact of oedema on use of health resources, employment and patient's quality of life. DESIGN: Questionnaire-based survey. METHODS: Health professionals from dedicated lymphoedema services, specific out-patient clinics, hospital wards and community services (GP clinics and district nurses) were contacted to provide information on patients from within South West London Community Trust. A subset of the identified patients was interviewed. RESULTS: Within the catchment area, 823 patients had chronic oedema (crude prevalence 1.33/1000). Prevalence increased with age (5.4/1000 in those aged > 65 years), and was higher in women (2.15 vs. 0.47/1000). Only 529 (64%) were receiving treatment, despite two specialist lymphoedema clinics within the catchment area. Of 228 patients interviewed, 78% had oedema lasting > 1 year. Over the previous year, 64/218 (29%) had had an acute infection in the affected area, 17/64 (27%) being admitted for intravenous antibiotics. Mean length of stay for this condition was 12 days, estimated mean cost pound 2300. Oedema caused time off work in > 80%, and affected employment status in 9%. Quality of life was below normal, with 50% experiencing pain or discomfort from their oedema. DISCUSSION: Chronic oedema is a common problem in the community with at least 100 000 patients suffering in the UK alone, a problem poorly recognized by health professionals. Lymphoedema arising for reasons other than cancer treatment is much more prevalent than generally perceived, yet resources for treatment are mainly cancer-based, leading to inequalities of care.

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/qjmed/hcg126

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 557

Metadata

Authors
Moffatt, C. J., Franks, P. J., Doherty, D. C., Williams, A. F., Badger, C., Jeffs, E., Bosanquet, N., & Mortimer, P. S.
Venue
QJM
Published
2003-09-18
Volume
96
Issue
10
Pages
731-738
ISSN
  • 0033-5622 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2725
  • 1460-2393
OpenAlex
W2115077526
Cited by
557
References
0
FWCI
3.46
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: Lymphoedema: an underestimated health problem. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/qjmed/hcg126
The paper
Moffatt, C. J., Franks, P. J., Doherty, D. C., Williams, A. F., Badger, C., Jeffs, E., Bosanquet, N., & Mortimer, P. S. (2003). Lymphoedema: an underestimated health problem. QJM. https://doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hcg126

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.