The Bristol Archive Project created a unique dataset of video-recorded primary care consultations plus linked survey and electronic patient records data with permissions in place for the data to be shared for future research and teaching purposes. This is now known as the 'One in a Million primary care consultations archive'. If you are interested in using our data for your research please see our section on accessing the data.

Data were collected in and around the Bristol between July 2014 - April 2015 from 327 unselected adult patients (18-96 years of age) consulting with 23 GPs in 12 different general practices across areas of high and low deprivation. 89.8% (n=300) consented to data access by ‘other researchers, subject to specific ethical approval’ and 89.5% (n=299) consented to data access by ‘approved researchers and university teachers’ for the development of medical and research training materials.

In addition to consultation video-recordings and verbatim transcripts, the dataset comprises a wide range of measures at practice level, GP level, patient level and visit level. 

What measures have been collected?

Timeline	Measures
Pre-data collection	Practice data GP demographics and survey
Immediately pre-consultation	Patient demographics and survey
Index consultation	Length of consultation Problems presented Issues discussed
Immediately post consultation	Patient survey GP checklist
Follow up at 10 days	Patient survey
At 3 months	Patient record data

At practice level

• Information was collected for each participating practice including geographical area, urban/rural classification, patient list size, area related deprivation score, QOF achievement, staffing, score on doctor-patient communication items on GP-Patient Survey and volume of appointments in the month of data collection;
• Recruitment data including numbers of sessions attended for data collection, numbers of appointments, DNAs, ineligible patients and reasons for ineligibility, patients missed, number of eligible patients, patients declined, patients consented, camera error, patients who withdrew, patients enrolled, practice consent rate, and numbers of video recordings vs audio-only.

At GP level

• GPs completed a survey on the first day of data collection including demographic information (year of qualification, time working at the practice, gender, age, employment status, working hours, whether they were an accredited trainer, prior experience of being video recorded, country of birth, ethnic group, main language), Job Satisfaction and Job Stress scales⁹ and items about Work-Related Burnout;¹⁰
• GPs completed a post-appointment checklist for each recorded consultation reporting on post-visit experiences¹, perception of decision-making⁴, familiarity with the patient, clinical certainty over treatment plan and confidence in the patient to follow it. The mode of recording is included here.

At patient level

• Pre-appointment survey including demographic information (gender, age, home owner, educational attainment, marital status, living arrangements, employment status, country of birth, ethic group, main language), reason for the visit, visit status, problem duration, pre-visit expectations¹, control preferences scale², perceived influence over consultation outcome¹, and questions about perceived physical and mental health status using the EQ-5D;³
• Post-appointment survey including post-visit experiences¹, patient perception of decision-making⁴, satisfaction with visit, the Patient-Doctor Depth-of-Relationship Scale⁵ and the Patient Enablement Index;⁶
• Follow-up survey around 10 days after the index recording containing questions about recall and adherence to GP-initiated prescription drug and self-care treatment recommendations using an investigator-adapted version of the Brief Medication Questionnaire⁷, plus the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire⁸ and the EQ-5D3;
• Information written by GPs relating to the index visit and any related subsequent events 3 months post index consultation (re-consulting, home or out-of-hours visit, emergency department visit, unplanned hospital admission) extracted from the medical records;
• Patient consents for future use and mode of recording.

At visit level

• Type and number of health problems and issues presented and discussed;¹¹
• Consultation length.

---

References

1. Bowling A, Rowe G, Lambert N, Waddington M, Mahtani KR, Kenten C, Howe A, Francis SA. The measurement of patients' expectations for health care: a review and psychometric testing of a measure of patients' expectations. Health Technol Assess. 2012 Jul;16(30):i-xii, 1-509.
2. Degner LF, Kristjanson LJ, Bowman D, et al. Information needs and decisional preferences in women with breast cancer. JAMA 277:1485-1492, 1997.
3. Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) Qual. Life Res. 2011;20(10):1727–1736.
4. Janz NK, Wren PA, Copeland LA, Lowery JC, Goldfarb SL, Wilkins EG. Patient-Physician Concordance: Preferences, Perceptions, and Factors Influencing the Breast Cancer Surgical Decision. JCO Aug 1, 2004:3091-3098.
5. Ridd M J, Lewis G, Peters T J, Salisbury C. Patient-Doctor Depth-of-Relationship Scale: Development and Validation. The Annals of Family Medicine 2011; 9(6): 538-545.
6. Howie JG, Heaney DJ, Maxwell M et al. A comparison of a patient enablement instrument (PEI) against two established satisfaction scales as an outcome measure of primary care consultations. Fam. Pract. 1998;15:165-171.
7. Svarstad B, Chewning B A, Sleath B L, Claesson C. The brief medication questionnaire: a tool for screening patient adherence and barriers to adherence. Patient Education and Counselling. 1999; 37: 113-24.
8. Horne R, Weinman J. Patients’ beliefs about prescribed medicines and their role in adherence to treatment in chronic physical illness. J Psychosom Res 1999;47:555–67.
9. Sutherland VJ, Cooper CL. Job stress, satisfaction, and mental health among general practitioners before and after introduction of new contract. BMJ 1992;304:1545-8.
10. Kristensen TS, Borritz M, Villadsen E, Christensen KB. The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory: A new tool for the assessment of burnout. Work & Stress 2005;19(3).
11. Procter S, Stewart K, Reeves D, Bowen L, Purdy S, Ridd M, Salisbury C. Complex consultations in primary care: a tool for assessing the range of health problems and issues addressed in general practice consultations. BMC Family Practice 2014, 15:105.