Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15113493›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2004

Improving the ascertainment of families at high risk of colorectal cancer: a prospective GP register study.

Peter W Rose, Michael Murphy, Marcus Munafo, Cyril Chapman, Neil Mortensen, Anneke Lucassen

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Can suicide in young men be prevented by improving access and delivery among primary care services?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2004
    Article
  7. Screening for colorectal cancer: decisions in general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2004
    Article
  8. Interprofessional collaboration and interprofessional education.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2004
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Peter W RoseDepartment of Primary Health Care, Institute of Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Old Road, Headington, Oxford OX3 7LF, UK. peter.rose@dphpc.ox.ac.uk
Michael Murphy
Marcus Munafo
Cyril Chapman
Neil Mortensen
Anneke Lucassen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundScreening for colorectal cancer is effective in family members with a high risk of this condition, owing to single gene mutations. However, it is not known which is the most effective method of ascertaining these families at high risk.

aimsTo investigate whether a case-finding approach using computerised general practitioner (GP) registers would improve the ascertainment of families at high risk of colorectal cancer due to family history. DESIGN OF STUDY: Prospective GP register study.

settingGeneral practices in Oxfordshire.

methodIdentification of patients with colorectal cancer using GP registers, followed by a family history questionnaire survey to identify those at high risk.

resultsUsing GP registers, 758 patients with a diagnosis of colorectal cancer were identified; a prevalence of 172 cases per 100 000 (95% confidence interval = 159 to 184). Of these, 305 patients, diagnosed under the age of 65 years, were sent a family history questionnaire. Two hundred and one (66%) patients responded to the survey; 10 (5%) patients were assessed as having high-risk families and 47 (23%) patients were assessed as having families at moderate risk. Eight of the high-risk patients had 34 first degree relatives who would benefit from routine disease surveillance, and 37 moderate-risk patients had 153 first degree relatives. Only two high-risk and six moderate-risk patients identified were previously known to the local Clinical Genetics Department.

conclusionA case-finding approach using GP records and a family history questionnaire is an effective way of identifying families at high risk of developing colorectal cancer, who can then be offered disease surveillance.

Indexed as

AdultColorectal Neoplasms, Hereditary NonpolyposisFamily PracticeHumansMass ScreeningMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID15113493
PMCPMC1314851

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.