Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17761056›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2007

Clinical features of primary brain tumours: a case-control study using electronic primary care records.

William Hamilton, David Kernick

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 53 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 90 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Interventions to reduce the time to diagnosis of brain tumours.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Underlying cancer risk among patients with fatigue and other vague symptoms: a population-based cohort study in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Missed opportunities for diagnosing brain tumours in primary care: a qualitative study of patient experiences.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

William HamiltonAcademic Unit of Primary Health Care, University of Bristol, Bristol. w.hamilton@bristol.ac.uk
David Kernick
Primary Health Care · QA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAround 4500 new primary brain tumours are diagnosed in the UK each year. Symptoms of these tumours have not previously been studied in primary care.

aimTo identify and quantify the clinical features of brain tumours in primary care. DESIGN OF STUDY: Case-control study.

settingThe General Practice Research Database, UK.

methodA total of 3505 patients with primary brain tumours diagnosed between May 1988 and March 2006, and 17 173 controls, matched for age (to 1 year), sex, and general practice, were studied. Full medical records for 6 months before diagnosis were searched for reports of clinical features previously associated with brain tumours. Odds ratios were calculated for variables independently associated with cancer, using conditional logistic regression, as were the positive predictive values for patients consulting in primary care.

resultsSeven features were associated with brain tumours before diagnosis. Positive predictive values against a background risk of 0.013% were: new-onset seizure, 1.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.0 to 1.4); weakness (as a symptom), 3.0% (95% CI = 1.7 to 4.9); headache, 0.09% (95% CI = 0.08 to 0.10); confusion, 0.20% (95% CI = 0.16 to 0.24); memory loss, 0.036% (95% CI = 0.026 to 0.052); visual disorder, 0.035% (95% CI = 0.025 to 0.051); and the physical sign of motor loss on examination, 0.026% (95% CI = 0.024 to 0.030); all P<0.001, except for visual disorder, P = 0.005. In a sub-analysis by age, the maximum risk of a brain tumour with headache or new-onset seizures was found in the age group 60-69 years (0.13% and 2.3% respectively).

conclusionThe findings suggest that isolated headache presented to primary care has too small a risk of an underlying brain tumour to warrant investigation at presentation. However, new-onset seizures should be investigated.

Indexed as

Family PracticeAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBrain NeoplasmsCase-Control StudiesDatabases as TopicFemaleHeadacheHumansMaleMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisReferral and Consultation

Identifiers

PMID17761056
PMCPMC2151783
OpenAlexW2111906393

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.