Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 894

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Epidemiology and impact of multimorbidity in primary care: a retrospective cohort study

Open access
Salisbury, Chris, Johnson, Leigh, Purdy, Sarah, Valderas, Jose M, Montgomery, Alan A·2011·British Journal of General Practice

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In developed countries, primary health care increasingly involves the care of patients with multiple chronic conditions, referred to as multimorbidity. AIM: To describe the epidemiology of multimorbidity and relationships between multimorbidity and primary care consultation rates and continuity of care. DESIGN OF STUDY: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Random sample of 99 997 people aged 18 years or over registered with 182 general practices in England contributing data to the General Practice Research Database. METHOD: Multimorbidity was defined using two approaches: people with multiple chronic conditions included in the Quality and Outcomes Framework, and people identified using the Johns Hopkins University Adjusted Clinical Groups (ACG®) Case-Mix System. The determinants of multimorbidity (age, sex, area deprivation) and relationships with consultation rate and continuity of care were examined using regression models. RESULTS: Sixteen per cent of patients had more than one chronic condition included in the Quality and Outcomes Framework, but these people accounted for 32% of all consultations. Using the wider ACG list of conditions, 58% of people had multimorbidity and they accounted for 78% of consultations. Multimorbidity was strongly related to age and deprivation. People with multimorbidity had higher consultation rates and less continuity of care compared with people without multimorbidity. CONCLUSION: Multimorbidity is common in the population and most consultations in primary care involve people with multimorbidity. These people are less likely to receive continuity of care, although they may be more likely to gain from it.

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 · 10.3399/bjgp11x548929

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 30 references

Cited by

See all 894

Metadata

Authors
Salisbury, C., Johnson, L., Purdy, S., Valderas, J. M., & Montgomery, A. A.
Venue
British Journal of General Practice
Published
2011-01-01
Volume
61
Issue
582
Pages
e12-e21
ISSN
  • 0960-1643 (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-5242
OpenAlex
W2102999566
Cited by
894
References
30
FWCI
28.74
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: Epidemiology and impact of multimorbidity in primary care: a retrospective cohort study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3399/bjgp11x548929
The paper
Salisbury, C., Johnson, L., Purdy, S., Valderas, J. M., & Montgomery, A. A. (2011). Epidemiology and impact of multimorbidity in primary care: a retrospective cohort study. British Journal of General Practice. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp11x548929

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.