Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 299

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The diabetes audit and research in Tayside Scotland (darts) study: electronic record linkage to create a diabetes register

Open access
Morris, Andrew D, Boyle, Douglas IR, MacAlpine, Ritchie, Emslie-Smith, Alistair, Jung, Roland T, Newton, Ray W, MacDonald, Thomas M·1997·BMJ

Abstract

Objectives: To identify all patients with diabetes in a community using electronic record linkage of multiple data sources and to compare this method of case ascertainment with registers of diabetic patients derived from primary care. Design: Electronic capture-recapture linkage of records included data on all patients attending hospital diabetes clinics, all encashed prescriptions for diabetes related drugs and monitoring equipment, all patients discharged from hospital, patients attending a mobile unit for eye screening, and results for glycated haemoglobin and plasma glucose concentrations from the regional biochemistry database. Diabetes registers from primary care were from a random sample of eight Tayside general practices. A detailed manual study of relevant records for the 35 144 patients registered with these eight general practices allowed for validation of the case ascertainment. Setting: Tayside region of Scotland, population 391 274 on 1 January 1996. Main outcome measures: Prevalence of diabetes; population of patients identified by different data sources; sensitivity and positive predictive value of ascertainment methods. Results: Electronic record linkage identified 7596 diabetic patients, giving a prevalence of known diabetes of 1.94% (0.21% insulin dependent diabetes, 1.73% non-insulin dependent): 63% of patients had attended hospital diabetes clinics, 68% had encashed diabetes related prescriptions, 72% had attended the mobile eye screening unit, and 48% had biochemical results diagnostic of diabetes. A further 701 patients had isolated hyperglycaemia (plasma glucose >11.1 mmol/l) but were not considered diabetic by general practitioners. Validation against the eight general practices (636 diabetic patients) showed electronic linkage to have a sensitivity of 0.96 and a positive predictive value of 0.95 for ascertainment of known diabetes. General practice lists had a sensitivity of 0.91 and a positive predictive value of 0.98. Conclusions: Electronic record linkage was more sensitive than general practice registers in identifying diabetic subjects and identified an additional 0.18% of the population with a history of hyperglycaemia who might warrant screening for undiagnosed diabetes. Key messages: It has been recommended that regional registers of patients with diabetes are established in order to facilitate effective monitoring and treatment of diabetes In Tayside we created a diabetes register by record linkage of multiple data sources: all patients attending hospital diabetes clinics, all encashed prescriptions for diabetes related drugs and monitoring equipment, all patients discharged from hospital, patients attending a mobile unit for eye screening, and results for glycated haemoglobin and plasma glucose concentrations from the regional biochemistry database This register identified 7596 patients with diabetes in Tayside, giving a prevalence of diabetes of 1.94% Record linkage was more sensitive than general practice registers in ascertaining cases of known diabetes A unique patient identifier, the community health number, was fundamental for successful record linkage

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 · 10.1136/bmj.315.7107.524

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 299

Metadata

Authors
Morris, A. D., Boyle, D. I., MacAlpine, R., Emslie-Smith, A., Jung, R. T., Newton, R. W., & MacDonald, T. M.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1997-08-30
Volume
315
Issue
7107
Pages
524-528
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W1552051186
Cited by
299
References
0
FWCI
33.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: The diabetes audit and research in Tayside Scotland (darts) study: electronic record linkage to create a diabetes register. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.315.7107.524
The paper
Morris, A. D., Boyle, D. I., MacAlpine, R., Emslie-Smith, A., Jung, R. T., Newton, R. W., & MacDonald, T. M. (1997). The diabetes audit and research in Tayside Scotland (darts) study: electronic record linkage to create a diabetes register. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7107.524

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.