AI Insight
This study analyzed over 1.4 million deaths in England between 2020-2025, comparing death records in primary care electronic health records with official death registrations from the Office for National Statistics. The research found that 88% of deaths had matching dates in both systems, while 8% of officially registered deaths had no corresponding primary care record. Discrepancies were more common among younger people (under 45 years), certain ethnic minority groups, and for deaths occurring close to the data extraction date.
Why it matters
These findings are critical for researchers using primary care databases for mortality studies, as incomplete or discordant death recording could introduce bias in research outcomes. The study provides practical guidance on how to handle death data in large-scale health research, particularly highlighting the need to account for data recency and demographic differences when analyzing mortality patterns.
Understand the Science
⚠️ Preprint – Noch nicht peer-reviewed
Dieser Artikel wurde noch nicht von unabhängigen Experten begutachtet. Die Ergebnisse sind vorläufig und sollten mit Vorsicht interpretiert werden.
Introduction: Primary care electronic health records (EHRs) are an important resource for health research, but death recording in primary care EHRs may be incomplete or differ from Office for National Statistics (ONS) death registrations. We used OpenSAFELY-TPP to assess the completeness and concordance of death recording and provide recommendations for using date-of-death information. Methods: Using linked primary care EHRs and ONS death registrations, we assessed whether ONS-registered deaths from 2020-2025 had a primary care date of death and, where present, calculated the difference between dates. Where a primary care date was absent, we assessed death-related SNOMED CT codes. Analyses were conducted overall and by year, population subgroup, and general practice. We also examined GP registration end dates and primary-care-recorded deaths without a corresponding ONS record, including monthly patterns near the data extraction date. Results: Among 1,409,275 ONS-registered deaths, 88% had the same date recorded in primary care and 8% had no corresponding primary care date. Among 1,324,995 deaths recorded in primary care, <2% had no corresponding ONS record. Deaths recorded in only one source were more frequent among people aged <45 years and those from Mixed, Asian or Asian British, Black or Black British, and Chinese or Other ethnic groups. ONS-only dates were also more frequent in London and the West Midlands. Primary-care-only deaths increased close to date of data extraction, reaching 7% in February 2026. Same-day GP deregistration increased from 9% in 2020 to 85% in 2025. Conclusions: Death recording in primary care EHRs showed high completeness and concordance with ONS registrations, but discrepancies remained for recent deaths and some population groups. Data recency and population-specific completeness should therefore be considered when using linked mortality data for research.