Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 528

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The epidemiology of multimorbidity in primary care: a retrospective cohort study

Open access
Cassell, Anna, Edwards, Duncan, Harshfield, Amelia, Rhodes, Kirsty, Brimicombe, James, Payne, Rupert, Griffin, Simon·2018·British Journal of General Practice

Abstract

Background: Multimorbidity places a substantial burden on patients and the healthcare system, but few contemporary epidemiological data are available. Aim: To describe the epidemiology of multimorbidity in adults in England, and quantify associations between multimorbidity and health service utilisation. Design and setting: Retrospective cohort study, undertaken in England. Method: The study used a random sample of 403 985 adult patients (aged ≥18 years), who were registered with a general practice on 1 January 2012 and included in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Multimorbidity was defined as having two or more of 36 long-term conditions recorded in patients’ medical records, and associations between multimorbidity and health service utilisation (GP consultations, prescriptions, and hospitalisations) over 4 years were quantified. Results: In total, 27.2% of the patients involved in the study had multimorbidity. The most prevalent conditions were hypertension (18.2%), depression or anxiety (10.3%), and chronic pain (10.1%). The prevalence of multimorbidity was higher in females than males (30.0% versus 24.4% respectively) and among those with lower socioeconomic status (30.0% in the quintile with the greatest levels of deprivation versus 25.8% in that with the lowest). Physical–mental comorbidity constituted a much greater proportion of overall morbidity in both younger patients (18–44 years) and those patients with a lower socioeconomic status. Multimorbidity was strongly associated with health service utilisation. Patients with multimorbidity accounted for 52.9% of GP consultations, 78.7% of prescriptions, and 56.1% of hospital admissions. Conclusion: Multimorbidity is common, socially patterned, and associated with increased health service utilisation. These findings support the need to improve the quality and efficiency of health services providing care to patients with multimorbidity at both practice and national level.

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/bjgp18x695465

Cites

16 of 16 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 16 references

Cited by

See all 528

Metadata

Authors
Cassell, A., Edwards, D., Harshfield, A., Rhodes, K., Brimicombe, J., Payne, R., & Griffin, S.
Venue
British Journal of General Practice
Published
2018-03-12
Volume
68
Issue
669
Pages
e245-e251
ISSN
  • 0960-1643 (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-5242
OpenAlex
W2791881027
Cited by
528
References
16
FWCI
29.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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 epidemiology of multimorbidity in primary care: a retrospective cohort study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3399/bjgp18x695465
The paper
Cassell, A., Edwards, D., Harshfield, A., Rhodes, K., Brimicombe, J., Payne, R., & Griffin, S. (2018). The epidemiology of multimorbidity in primary care: a retrospective cohort study. British Journal of General Practice. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp18x695465

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.