ArticleBMC family practice2008
Determining patient and primary care delay in the diagnosis of cancer - lessons from a pilot study of patients referred for suspected cancer.
Article in BMC family practice, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient-reported measurement of time to diagnosis in cancer: development of the Cancer Symptom Interval Measure (C-SIM) and randomised controlled trial of method of delivery.BMC health services research · 2014Trial
- Observational
- Does the Primary Care Experience Influence the Cancer Diagnostic Process?International journal of family medicine · 2015Article
- Which symptoms matter? Self-report and observer discrepancies in repressors and high-anxious women with metastatic breast cancer.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2014Article
- Differences in cancer awareness and beliefs between Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK (the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership): do they contribute to differences in cancer survival?British journal of cancer · 2013Article
- Development and validation of a questionnaire to assess delay in treatment for breast cancer.BMC cancer · 2012Article
- 'Tempos' management in primary care: a key factor for classifying adverse events, and improving quality and safety.BMJ quality & safety · 2012Article
- Diagnosis delay in Libyan female breast cancer.BMC research notes · 2012Article
- Article
- Patient delay in cancer studies: a discussion of methods and measures.BMC health services research · 2009Article
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
backgroundThere is no validated way of measuring diagnostic delay in cancer, especially covering patient and primary care delays. An instrument is needed in order to determine the effect of potential interventions to reduce delay and improve cancer morbidity and mortality.
methodsDevelopment of a postal questionnaire tool to measure patient and primary care time responses to key symptoms and signs. The pilot questionnaire was sent to 184 patients with suspected cancer.
resultsThe response rate was only 85/184 (46.2%). Anxiety was cited as one reason for this low response. Patients returning questionnaires were more likely to be women and more likely to be younger. 84/85 (98.8%) provided consent to access medical records, and questions regarding health profile, smoking and socio-economic profile were answered adequately. Outcome data on their cancer diagnosis was linked satisfactorily and the question about GP-initiated investigations was answered well. Estimated dates for symptom duration were preferred for patient delays, but exact dates were preferred for primary care delays; however there was a significant amount of missing data.
conclusionA more personal approach to the collection of data about the duration of symptoms in this group of people is needed other than a postal questionnaire. However elements of this piloted questionnaire are likely to figure strongly in future development and evaluation of this tool.
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.