ArticleAtencion primaria2002
[Characteristics of diagnoses of malignant neoplasms in primary care].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo describe the diagnostic process of malignant neoplasms according to the level of care, initial symptoms and diagnostic procedures.Design. Retrospective descriptive study.
settingHealth centre on the periphery of a big city.
participantsCases of malignant neoplasms recorded between 1990 and 2000 through the mortality register and specific recording in 2000. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: We reviewed the records, obtaining age and gender, location, initial symptoms, date of first consultation and at what care level, diagnostic tests requested in primary care (PC) and the time elapsed until they became available, until the patients referral and until the definitive diagnosis. 274 cases were included, with information lacking for 12.
results42.4% were women, with average age 67.6. The most frequent types of cancer were digestive, respiratory and masculine genital-urinary. 75.2% consulted initially in PC. The most common symptoms were pain and haemorrhage. Of those attended in PC, diagnostic tests were requested for 46.7%, the most common of these being basic analysis (53.2%) and simple x-ray (24.8%). Mean time before results were available was 15.4 days. 67.2% of all cases were referred. Mean time from consultation to referral was 7.3 days; and to definitive diagnosis, 68.0 days. However, for those initially attended in PC, the mean wait was 81.0 days; and at other levels, 30 days (P<.0001).
conclusionsMost patients consult on their initial symptoms in PC. The time taken for the diagnostic process at this level is adequate, although the total length of the process is greater for those who first consulted in PC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.