ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2007
Rectal and postmenopausal bleeding: consultation and referral of patients with and without severe mental health problems.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review of clinical features of suspected colorectal cancer in primary care.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2014Pooled it
- Positive predictive values of ≥5% in primary care for cancer: systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2010Pooled it
- Symptoms and signs of urogenital cancer in primary care.BMC primary care · 2023Article
- Risk of uterine cancer in symptomatic women in primary care: case-control study using electronic records.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2013Article
- Explaining variation in referral from primary to secondary care: cohort study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeople with severe mental health problems receive less effective care for some physical conditions. There is concern that this could apply to rectal bleeding or postmenopausal bleeding. Published estimates of consultation rates and outcomes for these symptoms vary widely.
aimTo estimate rates of first-ever consultation for rectal bleeding and postmenopausal bleeding in general practice, together with subsequent referrals and outcomes. To identify inequalities for patients with severe mental health problems. DESIGN OF STUDY: Cohort study.
settingPrimary care.
methodPatients with first-ever consultations for rectal or postmenopausal bleeding were identified among more than 3 million patients from 328 practices contributing routine data to the QRESEARCH database. Their records were followed for 2 years.
resultsThere were 30 175 first consultations for rectal bleeding (2.6 per thousand patients per year at age 25-29 years, rising to 4.8 over age 85 years) and 10 142 for postmenopausal bleeding (highest at 7.4 per thousand per year aged 55-59 years). Overall, 2.2% of those with rectal bleeding and 1.7% of those with postmenopausal bleeding went on to have a relevant cancer diagnosis within 2 years. Cancer risk was strongly related to age, and was higher for males with rectal bleeding than females with rectal bleeding. Recorded referrals were at similar rates among patients with and without severe mental health problems.
conclusionThe rate of first consultations for rectal bleeding or postmenopausal bleeding is relatively low. Less than 2.5% overall have a relevant cancer diagnosis within 2 years. There is no evidence of inequality in referral for patients with severe mental health problems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17504587PMC2047011W2139633138What 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.