Outputs and Growth of Primary Care Databases in the United Kingdom: Bibliometric Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Electronic health database (EHD) data is increasingly used by researchers. The major United Kingdom EHDs are the 'Clinical Practice Research Datalink' (CPRD), 'The Health Improvement Network' (THIN) and 'QResearch'. Over time, outputs from these databases have increased, but have not been evaluated. OBJECTIVE: This study compares research outputs from CPRD, THIN and QResearch assessing growth and publication outputs over a 10-year period (2004-2013). CPRD was also reviewed separately over 20 years as a case study. METHODS:  Publications from CPRD and QResearch were extracted using the Science Citation Index (SCI) of the Thomson Scientific Institute for Scientific Information (Web of Science). THIN data was obtained from University College London and validated in Web of Science. All databases were analysed for growth in publications, the speciality areas and the journals in which their data have been published. RESULTS: These databases collectively produced 1,296 publications over a ten-year period, with CPRD representing 63.6% (n=825 papers), THIN 30.4% (n=394) and QResearch 5.9% (n=77). Pharmacoepidemiology and General Medicine were the most common specialities featured. Over the 9-year period (2004-2013), publications for THIN and QResearch have slowly increased over time, whereas CPRD publications have increased substantially in last 4 years with almost 75% of CPRD publications published in the past 9 years. CONCLUSION: These databases are enhancing scientific research and are growing yearly, however display variability in their growth. They could become more powerful research tools if the National Health Service and general practitioners can provide accurate and comprehensive data for inclusion in these databases

Research Outputs of England's Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) Database: Bibliometric Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hospital administrative data, such as those provided by the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) database in England, are increasingly being used for research and quality improvement. To date, no study has tried to quantify and examine trends in the use of HES for research purposes. OBJECTIVE: To examine trends in the use of HES data for research. METHODS: Publications generated from the use of HES data were extracted from PubMed and analysed. Publications from 1996 to 2014 were then examined further in the Science Citation Index (SCI) of the Thompson Scientific Institute for Science Information (Web of Science) for details of research specialty area. RESULTS: 520 studies, categorised into 44 specialty areas, were extracted from PubMed. The review showed an increase in publications over the 18-year period with an average of 27 publications per year, however with the majority of output observed in the latter part of the study period. The highest number of publications was in the Health Statistics specialty area. CONCLUSION: The use of HES data for research is becoming more common. Increase in publications over time shows that researchers are beginning to take advantage of the potential of HES data. Although HES is a valuable database, concerns exist over the accuracy and completeness of the data entered. Clinicians need to be more engaged with HES for the full potential of this database to be harnessed