Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Artificial Intelligence in Primary Care: call for articles
    • Social Care Integration with Primary Care: call for articles
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • BJGP CONFERENCE →
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
BJGP Open
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow BJGP Open on Instagram
  • Visit bjgp open on Bluesky
  • Blog
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
BJGP Open

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Artificial Intelligence in Primary Care: call for articles
    • Social Care Integration with Primary Care: call for articles
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • BJGP CONFERENCE →
Research

Has the new Scottish GP contract improved GPs’ working lives in deprived areas? A secondary analysis of two cross-sectional national surveys of GPs’ views in 2018 and 2023

Lauren Ng, Carey J Lunan and Stewart W Mercer
BJGP Open 10 February 2026; BJGPO.2025.0055. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2025.0055
Lauren Ng
1Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Lauren Ng
Carey J Lunan
1Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stewart W Mercer
1Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Stewart W Mercer
  • For correspondence: stewart.mercer{at}ed.ac.uk
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background The new 2018 Scottish GP contract aimed to reduce GP workload and address health inequalities in primary care.

Aim To compare the working life experiences of GPs working in affluent and deprived areas in 2023, and assess changes since 2018.

Design & setting Two postal surveys were conducted in 2018 (n = 2465, 56% response rate) and 2023 (n = 1378, 30% response rate), of all qualified GPs in Scotland.

Method Secondary analysis of GP working life experiences (job satisfaction, job pressures, negative and positive job attributes) in the most affluent and deprived quintiles. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to adjust mean values for GP and practice characteristics that differed significantly between affluent and deprived settings.

Results In 2023, GPs in affluent areas reported lower job pressures (P<0.001) and fewer negative job attributes (P<0.001) than GPs in deprived areas in both unadjusted and adjusted analysis. Compared with 2018, GPs in affluent areas in 2023 reported significant improvements in job satisfaction, job pressures, and negative job attributes in unadjusted (P = 0.016, P<0.001, and P<0.001, respectively) and adjusted (P = 0.023, P = 0.001, and P<0.001, respectively) analysis, and positive job attributes in adjusted analysis (P = 0.045). In contrast, GPs in deprived areas reported a significant increase in job pressures (P = 0.029), with no other changes in working life experiences.

Conclusion Since the implementation of the 2018 Scottish GP contract, stark contrasts continue to exist in the working life experiences of GPs in affluent areas compared with deprived areas. Targeted strategies are required to address the inverse care law in order to achieve the contract’s intended goals.

  • general practice
  • Scottish GP contract
  • deprivation
  • health inequalities
  • inverse care law
  • health inequities
  • primary health care

How this fits in

The 2018 Scottish GP contract aimed to reduce health inequalities and GP workload, but evidence of its impact has been limited. While qualitative studies have highlighted challenges in deprived areas, there is limited quantitative evidence to support this. This study compares the working life experiences of GPs in affluent and deprived areas in 2023, and examines changes since 2018, 5 years after the start of the new contract. The findings demonstrate improvements across all domains of working life (job satisfaction, job pressure, negative job attributes, and positive job attributes) for GPs working in affluent areas, but increasing job pressures for GPs in deprived areas (and no changes in the other three domains), emphasising the need for targeted strategies to address the inverse care law in order to achieve the contract’s intended goals.

Introduction

Scotland has the widest health inequalities and lowest life expectancy in Western Europe, with the gap continuing to widen.1,2 These disparities are more pronounced in socioeconomically deprived areas, where the life expectancy is over a decade shorter in the most deprived regions, compared with the more affluent regions, and healthy life expectancy — defined as years lived in good health — is reduced by more than 20 years.2,3

Primary care and general practice plays a key role in addressing health inequalities, improving population health, and reducing healthcare costs.4 Despite general practice being the largest sector of NHS activity, it receives 6.5% of the total NHS budget in Scotland (compared with approximately 11% 15 years ago),5 a figure approximately reflected across the UK.6–8 This allocation is particularly significant in deprived areas, where the inverse care law exists and ‘the availability of good medical care tends to vary inversely with the need for it in the population served’. 9 In such areas of high deprivation, the higher demand for healthcare — driven by factors such as mental health problems and complex multimorbidity, leading to higher consultation rates and poorer health outcomes — places greater pressure on the available resources and workforce supply, which is not matched to the healthcare needs of the population being served.10,11

In 2018, the Scottish Government introduced its first GP contract, with stated aims to address health inequalities and alleviate GP workload through the expansion of multidisciplinary teams (MDT).12 However, recent qualitative evidence has highlighted ongoing challenges, particularly in deprived areas, in relation to GP workload and health inequalities.13 Soon after the implementation of the new Scottish contract, a 2018 national survey demonstrated disparities in working life experiences between GPs in affluent and deprived areas.14 No quantitative studies have yet examined how the contract has influenced these experiences in affluent and deprived areas since then.

A follow-up survey was conducted in 2023 using the same working life questions as the 2018 survey, providing an opportunity to assess the impacts of the contract on GP working life experiences 5 years after its implementation.15 This study aims to evaluate whether the contract has addressed these disparities by comparing the current working life experiences of GPs in affluent and deprived areas in 2023, and assessing changes from 2018 to 2023.

Method

Study design and setting

This study is a secondary analysis of two national cross-sectional surveys conducted in 2018 and 2023, examining the work life experiences of GPs in Scotland.

A postal survey of all qualified GPs in Scotland was conducted in October 2023,15 replicating the 2018 survey process.16 In 2023, surveys (n = 4529) were sent using GPs' names and practice addresses,17 with two reminders for non-responders. Unique identifiers enabled follow-up of responders and non-responders. Data collection ended in March 2024.

A total of 2465 out of 4371 (56%) responded to the 2018 survey, and 1378 out of 4529 (30%) to the 2023 survey.15,16 The characteristics of responding GPs were very similar in both years, and were broadly nationally representative at both time points.15,16

Instruments used

The 2023 Scottish GP survey employed the same validated measures of working life as the 2018 Scottish GP survey and the English National GP Worklife Survey,16,18 which has been described in full elsewhere.15 In brief, the survey assessed four key domains of current working life: job satisfaction, job pressures, and positive and negative job attributes.

Deprivation was measured based on the percentage of registered patients classified as ‘very deprived’ by the Scottish Government, defined as those in the top 15% of deprivation as measured by the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD).19 Practices were subsequently categorised into deprivation quintiles, with quintile 1 representing the least deprived areas (affluent) and quintile 5 the most deprived (deprived).

Data analysis

Survey data from 2018 and 2023 was analysed using SPSS (version 27), with a specific focus on GPs practising in affluent (quintile 1) and deprived (quintile 5) areas. Comparative descriptive analysis was conducted using appropriate parametric or non-parametric tests, depending on the variable type and distribution. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used for multivariate analysis to assess the variance in responses explained by group differences, applied only when significant differences were observed between groups.

Results

GP working life experiences 2023

The characteristics of GPs in affluent and deprived areas from the 2023 survey are shown in Table 1. A significantly higher proportion of GPs in deprived areas were non-White (P = 0.019) and more worked seven or more sessions per week (P<0.001), compared with those in affluent areas. No other significant differences in demographic or practice-related characteristics were observed.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1. Characteristics of GPs working in affluent and deprived areas in 2023

In 2023, GPs in affluent areas reported significantly higher job satisfaction (P = 0.012), lower job pressures (P<0.001), and fewer negative job attributes (P<0.001), compared with those in deprived areas (Table 2). After adjusting for ethnicity and number of sessions, differences between the two surveys in job satisfaction were no longer significant. However, job pressures (adjusted P<0.001) and negative job attributes (adjusted P<0.001) remained significantly lower in affluent areas. Positive job attributes did not differ between the groups in either analysis.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2. Differences in GP working life experiences between affluent and deprived areas in 2023

Changes in GP working life experiences between 2018 and 2023

Table 3 shows the GP and practice characteristics of those working in affluent and deprived areas for both the 2018 and 2023 surveys. In the affluent-area group, a greater proportion of GPs were working fewer than seven sessions per week in 2023 compared with 2018 (P<0.001). No other significant demographic or practice-related differences were found. In the deprived-area group, no significant differences were observed in the GP or practice characteristics between the two surveys.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3. Characteristics of GPs in affluent and deprived areas in 2018 and 2023

In the unadjusted analyses, GPs in affluent areas reported significant improvements in job satisfaction (P = 0.016), reduced job pressures (P<0.001), and fewer negative job attributes (P<0.001) between 2018 and 2023. However, there was no significant change in positive job attributes. After adjusting for the number of sessions, all of these improvements in the affluent group remained significant (adjusted P-values: job satisfaction P = 0.023, job pressures P<0.001, negative job attributes P<0.001). Additionally, positive job attributes showed a significant improvement after adjustment (adjusted P = 0.045) (Table 4).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 4. Differences in GP working life experiences between 2018 and 2023 for affluent and deprived areas

In contrast, GPs in deprived areas demonstrated an increase in job pressures (P = 0.029) in 2023 compared with 2018, but no significant improvements in other working life experiences (Table 4).

Discussion

Summary

This study examined GP working life experiences in affluent and deprived areas in 2023 and compared changes between 2018 and 2023. In 2023, GPs working in affluent areas reported higher job satisfaction, lower job pressures, and fewer negative job attributes compared with those working in deprived areas. After adjusting for GP characteristics that differed significantly between the high and low deprivation groups (ethnicity and the number of sessions worked), job pressures and negative job attributes remained lower in affluent areas, but differences in job satisfaction were no longer significant. Positive job attributes did not differ between the two groups in either unadjusted or adjusted analyses.

Between 2018 and 2023, GPs working in affluent areas saw improvements across most working life domains in both unadjusted and adjusted analyses, including job satisfaction, job pressures, and negative job attributes. While positive job attributes showed no change in the unadjusted analysis, a significant improvement was observed after adjusting for the number of sessions worked (P = 0.045). In contrast, GPs in deprived areas reported an increase in job pressures, with no significant improvements in other working life domains.

Strengths and limitations

This study utilised nationally representative data from two cross-sectional surveys in 2018 and 2023, facilitating direct comparison of GP working life experiences soon after and 2 years following the 2018 Scottish GP contract’s implementation. The use of validated measures to assess GP working life experiences also provides methodological consistency, and comparison with other studies.

Limitations include a lower response rate in 2023 (30%) compared with 2018 (56%), which may introduce non-response bias. However, the demographic characteristics of responders were similar across both years.15 Previous research suggests that non-responding GPs are more likely to face greater time constraints and job pressures, potentially underestimating the extent of these challenges.20 Reasons for this lower response rate are unclear but may relate to increased workload in general practice and the fact that the survey was somewhat longer in 2023 than 2018 owing to additional questions relating to multidisciplinary teams.

Comparison with existing literature

These findings reinforce the ongoing presence of the inverse care law in Scotland, where the higher levels of multimorbidity and social complexity in deprived areas place greater demands on primary care,21 and are associated with poorer access, shorter GP consultation times, higher GP stress, and lower patient enablement than affluent areas.10,11,21–24 Workforce shortages and underfunding relative to need further challenge these issues.10,11

These patterns have also been observed across the UK and internationally.24–27 In Denmark, GPs in deprived areas report higher rates of burnout,25 while in Australia, market-driven healthcare forces exacerbate inequalities, limiting private providers’ ability to meet the needs of patients in deprived areas.26

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on working life also warrants consideration. The pandemic had notable influence on general practice, including worsening time pressures and lower staff morale.13,28 Lower socioeconomic groups were disproportionately affected by the health and economic effects of the pandemic,29 which may have also amplified GP pressures in deprived areas. Nevertheless, while intensified by the pandemic, these challenges stem from pre-existing inequalities in chronic disease burden and social determinants of health.30

Implications for research and practice

Despite the 2018 Scottish GP contract’s aims to reduce GP workload and address health inequalities,12 our findings suggest it has not yet achieved these goals for GPs working in deprived areas.12,13 Indeed, our results would suggest that (in terms of the working life domains we have measured) the contract has ‘worked’ for GPs working in more affluent areas but ‘not worked’ for GP working in more deprived areas. The long-term effects of the pandemic may have contributed to these disparities, which were apparent in 2018 but clearly persist in 2023.29,30

At the time of writing, phase two negotiations of the Scottish GP contract are underway, which will refine funding models and resource allocation for general practice.12 This presents an opportunity to ensure funding models better reflect the complexity and intensity of workload and support equitable resource distribution, particularly in the areas of greatest need.

Various interventions to address the inverse care law in Scotland have been undertaken, including enhancing financial support, targeting specific health conditions, and improving the ability to provide high-quality generalist care.31 For example, the CARE Plus intervention, which focused on longer consultations and continuity of care for patients with multimorbidity in deprived areas, was both cost-effective (£12 224 per quality-adjusted life year gained) and improved quality of life.32 However, a significant gap between policy ambitions and their sustainable delivery remains.31 Research has also shown that sustained NHS investment in more socioeconomically deprived areas can reduce mortality gaps and improve outcomes, reinforcing the need for long-term, needs-based funding.33

In addition, a clearer understanding of ‘unmet need’ in general practice could improve funding allocations.34 Recent research has used routine national data to quantify unmet need by comparing GP contact time between patients from affluent and deprived groups, demonstrating the potential of data-driven approaches to inform equitable funding models.35 Further research is needed to develop measurable proxies of unmet need to better inform resource allocation.36

In conclusion, this study highlights the persisting disparity in working life experiences between GPs in affluent and deprived areas, despite the introduction of the 2018 Scottish GP contract. While GPs working in affluent areas report improvements, job pressures in deprived areas have increased, with no significant changes in other working life experiences. These findings underscore the need for further policy changes to address the inverse care law and fulfil the contract’s aim to reduce health inequalities in Scotland.

Notes

Funding

This study was funded by a research grant from the Economic and Social Research Council (ES/ T014164/1).

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was obtained from the Wales REC 6 research ethics committee (REC reference: 21/WA/0078) and research and development approval from participating Scottish health boards.

Provenance

Freely submitted; externally peer reviewed.

Data

The dataset relied on in this article is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank all the practices, GPs, and patients who took part in this study.

Competing interests

The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  • Received March 11, 2025.
  • Revision received June 24, 2025.
  • Accepted July 14, 2025.
  • Copyright © 2026, The Authors

This article is Open Access: CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Miall N,
    2. Fergie G,
    3. Pearce A
    (2023) Health inequalities in Scotland: trends in deaths, health and wellbeing, health behaviours, and health services since 2000. accessed. https://www.health.org.uk/sites/default/files/2022-11/health-inequalities-scotland-reportandappendices.pdf. 8 Dec 2025.
  2. 2.↵
    1. National Records of Scotland
    (2024) Life expectancy in Scotland 2021–2023. accessed. https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/media/pslb0evx/life-expectancy-2021-2023-report-corrected.pdf. 8 Dec 2025.
  3. 3.↵
    1. Scottish Government
    (2023) Long-term monitoring of health inequalities March 2023 report. accessed. https://www.gov.scot/publications/long-term-monitoring-health-inequalities-march-2023-report/. 8 Dec 2025.
  4. 4.↵
    1. Caley M
    (2013) Remember Barbara Starfield: primary care is the health system’s bedrock. BMJ 347, doi:10.1136/bmj.f4627, pmid:23900532. bmj.f4627.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Public Health Scotland
    (2023) Scottish Health Service costs: year ended March 2022. A National Statistics release for Scotland. accessed. https://publichealthscotland.scot/media/17856/2023-02-21-costs-report.pdf. 8 Dec 2025.
  6. 6.↵
    1. Wales Audit Office
    (2019) Primary care services in Wales. accessed. https://www.audit.wales/sites/default/files/Primary-care-services-in-Wales-2019-eng_11.pdf. 8 Dec 2025.
  7. 7.
    1. Carville D
    (2024) Access to general practice in Northern Ireland — report. accessed. .. .. https://www.niauditoffice.gov.uk/publications/html-document/access-general-practice-northern-ireland-report. 8 Dec 2025.
  8. 8.↵
    1. Baird B,
    2. Fenney D,
    3. Jefferies D,
    4. Brooks A
    (2024) Making care closer to home a reality: refocusing the system to primary and community care. accessed. https://assets.kingsfund.org.uk/f/256914/x/ab65341d7a/making_care_closer_home_reality_report_2024.pdf. 8 Dec 2025.
  9. 9.↵
    1. Tudor Hart J
    (1971) The inverse care law. Lancet 297(7696):405–412, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(71)92410-X.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Mercer SW,
    2. Lunan C,
    3. Henderson D,
    4. Blane DN
    (2023) Is Scotland’s new GP contract addressing the inverse care law? Future Healthc J 10(3):287–290, doi:10.7861/fhj.2023-0068, pmid:38162197.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. McLean G,
    2. Guthrie B,
    3. Mercer SW,
    4. Watt GCM
    (2015) General practice funding underpins the persistence of the inverse care law: cross-sectional study in Scotland. Br J Gen Pract 65(641):e799–e805, doi:10.3399/bjgp15X687829, pmid:26622032.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    1. Scottish Government
    (2017) The 2018 General Medical Services contract in Scotland. accessed. https://www.gov.scot/publications/gms-contract-scotland/. 8 Dec 2025.
  13. 13.↵
    1. Donaghy E,
    2. Huang H,
    3. Henderson D,
    4. et al.
    (2023) Primary care transformation in Scotland: qualitative evaluation of the views of general practitioners and multidisciplinary team staff members. Br J Gen Pract 74(738):e1–e8, doi:10.3399/BJGP.2023.0086.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    1. Mercer SW,
    2. Lunan CJ,
    3. MacRae C,
    4. et al.
    (2023) Half a century of the inverse care law: a comparison of general practitioner job satisfaction and patient satisfaction in deprived and affluent areas of Scotland. Scott Med J 68(1):14–20, doi:10.1177/00369330221132156, pmid:36250546.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Donaghy E,
    2. Sweeney KD,
    3. Ng L,
    4. et al.
    (2025) Primary care transformation in Scotland: a comparison of two cross-sectional national surveys of GPs’ views in 2018 and 2023. Br J Gen Pract 75(757):e559–e565, doi:10.3399/BJGP.2024.0500, pmid:39778945.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.↵
    1. Hayes H,
    2. Gibson J,
    3. Fitzpatrick B,
    4. et al.
    (2020) Working lives of GPs in Scotland and England: cross-sectional analysis of national surveys. BMJ Open 10(10), doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042236, pmid:33127639. e042236.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    1. Public Health Scotland
    (2025) General practitioner contact details. accessed. https://www.opendata.nhs.scot/dataset/general-practitioner-contact-details. 8 Dec 2025.
  18. 18.↵
    1. Odebiyi B,
    2. Walker B,
    3. Gibson J,
    4. et al.
    (2022) Eleventh national GP worklife survey 2021. accessed. https://prucomm.ac.uk/assets/uploads/files/eleventh-gpwls-2021.pdf. 8 Dec 2025.
  19. 19.↵
    1. Scottish Government
    (2020) Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation 2020. accessed. http://www.gov.scot/collections/scottish-index-of-multiple-deprivation-2020. 8 Dec 2025.
  20. 20.↵
    1. Morris CJ,
    2. Cantrill JA,
    3. Weiss MC
    (2001) GP survey response rate: a miscellany of influencing factors. Fam Pract 18(4):454–456, doi:10.1093/fampra/18.4.454, pmid:11477056.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Mercer SW,
    2. Watt GCM
    (2007) The inverse care law: clinical primary care encounters in deprived and affluent areas of Scotland. Ann Fam Med 5(6):503–510, doi:10.1370/afm.778, pmid:18025487.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.
    1. Gopfert A,
    2. Deeny SR,
    3. Fisher R,
    4. Stafford M
    (2021) Primary care consultation length by deprivation and multimorbidity in England: an observational study using electronic patient records. Br J Gen Pract 71(704):e185–e192, doi:10.3399/bjgp20X714029, pmid:33318089.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. 23.
    1. Mercer SW,
    2. Higgins M,
    3. Bikker AM,
    4. et al.
    (2016) General practitioners’ empathy and health outcomes: a prospective observational study of consultations in areas of high and low deprivation. Ann Fam Med 14(2):117–124, doi:10.1370/afm.1910, pmid:26951586.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    1. Nussbaum C,
    2. Massou E,
    3. Fisher R,
    4. et al.
    (2021) Inequalities in the distribution of the general practice workforce in England: a practice-level longitudinal analysis. BJGP Open 5(5), doi:10.3399/BJGPO.2021.0066, pmid:34404634. BJGPO.2021.0066.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. 25.↵
    1. Pedersen AF,
    2. Vedsted P
    (2014) Understanding the inverse care law: a register and survey-based study of patient deprivation and burnout in general practice. Int J Equity Health 13(1), doi:10.1186/s12939-014-0121-3, pmid:25495229. 121.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Harris E,
    2. Harris MF
    (2023) An exploration of the inverse care law and market forces in Australian primary health care. Aust J Prim Health 29(2):137–141, doi:10.1071/PY22160, pmid:36403292.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    1. Moran V,
    2. Nolte E,
    3. Suhrcke M,
    4. Ruiz-Castell M
    (2025) Investigating the relationship between unmet need and utilisation of health care in European countries. Soc Sci Med 369:117715, doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.117715, pmid:39954301.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Kidd C,
    2. Donaghy E,
    3. Huang H,
    4. et al.
    (2023) Challenges in implementing GP clusters in Scotland: a qualitative study comparing the views of senior primary care stakeholders in 2016 with those in 2021. BJGP Open 7(2), doi:10.3399/BJGPO.2022.0152, pmid:36868788. BJGPO.2022.0152.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  29. 29.↵
    1. Stantcheva S
    (2022) Inequalities in the times of a pandemic. Economic Policy 37(109):5–41, doi:10.1093/epolic/eiac006.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  30. 30.↵
    1. Blundell R,
    2. Costa Dias M,
    3. Joyce R,
    4. Xu X
    (2020) COVID-19 and inequalities. Fisc Stud 41(2):291–319, doi:10.1111/1475-5890.12232, pmid:32836542.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    1. Blane D,
    2. Lunan C,
    3. Bogie J,
    4. et al.
    (2024) Tackling the inverse care law in Scottish general practice: policies, interventions and the Scottish Deep End Project. accessed. https://www.health.org.uk/reports-and-analysis/reports/tackling-the-inverse-care-law-in-scottish-general-practice. 8 Dec 2025.
  32. 32.↵
    1. Mercer SW,
    2. Fitzpatrick B,
    3. Guthrie B,
    4. et al.
    (2016) The CARE Plus study — a whole-system intervention to improve quality of life of primary CARE patients with multimorbidity in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation: exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial and cost-utility analysis. BMC Med 14(1), doi:10.1186/s12916-016-0634-2, pmid:27328975. 88.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. 33.↵
    1. Barr B,
    2. Bambra C,
    3. Whitehead M
    (2014) The impact of NHS resource allocation policy on health inequalities in England 2001–11: longitudinal ecological study. BMJ 348, doi:10.1136/bmj.g3231, pmid:24865459. g3231.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  34. 34.↵
    1. Royal College of General Practitioners Scotland
    (2024) The Scottish GP workforce and socioeconomic health inequalities. accessed. https://www.rcgp.org.uk/getmedia/263e368d-1dc2-4ac8-9180-05d9da9158bb/Scottish-GP-Workforce-Socioeconomic-Health-Inequalities.pdf. 8 Dec 2025.
  35. 35.↵
    1. McConnachie A,
    2. Ellis DA,
    3. Wilson P,
    4. et al.
    (2023) Quantifying unmet need in general practice: a retrospective cohort study of administrative data. BMJ Open 13(9), doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-068720, pmid:37714681. e068720.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. 36.↵
    1. Aragón MJA,
    2. Chalkley M,
    3. Goddard M
    (2017) Defining and measuring unmet need to guide healthcare funding: identifying and filling the gaps. accessed. https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/135415/. 8 Dec 2025.
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

Latest Articles

Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for recommending BJGP Open.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Has the new Scottish GP contract improved GPs’ working lives in deprived areas? A secondary analysis of two cross-sectional national surveys of GPs’ views in 2018 and 2023
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from BJGP Open
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from BJGP Open.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Has the new Scottish GP contract improved GPs’ working lives in deprived areas? A secondary analysis of two cross-sectional national surveys of GPs’ views in 2018 and 2023
Lauren Ng, Carey J Lunan, Stewart W Mercer
BJGP Open 10 February 2026; BJGPO.2025.0055. DOI: 10.3399/BJGPO.2025.0055

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Has the new Scottish GP contract improved GPs’ working lives in deprived areas? A secondary analysis of two cross-sectional national surveys of GPs’ views in 2018 and 2023
Lauren Ng, Carey J Lunan, Stewart W Mercer
BJGP Open 10 February 2026; BJGPO.2025.0055. DOI: 10.3399/BJGPO.2025.0055
del.icio.us logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo Bluesky logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • Abstract
    • How this fits in
    • Introduction
    • Method
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Notes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • general practice
  • Scottish GP contract
  • deprivation
  • health inequalities
  • inverse care law
  • health inequities
  • primary health care

More in this TOC Section

  • Perceptions and practices of UK GPs towards youth vaping: a questionnaire-based study
  • Exploring the barriers and facilitators to discussing social media in primary care for young adults with mental health concerns: a qualitative study
Show more Research

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Latest articles
  • Authors & reviewers
  • Accessibility statement

RCGP

  • British Journal of General Practice
  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP Open
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP Open: research
  • Writing for BJGP Open: practice & policy
  • BJGP Open editorial process & policies
  • BJGP Open ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP Open

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Open access licence

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Open Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: bjgpopen@rcgp.org.uk

BJGP Open is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners

© 2026 BJGP Open

Online ISSN: 2398-3795