Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19068162›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2008

Imaging patients with suspected brain tumour: guidance for primary care.

David P Kernick, Fayyaz Ahmed, Anish Bahra, Andrew Dowson, Giles Elrington, Manuela Fontebasso, Nicola J Giffin, Sue Lipscombe, Anne MacGregor, Richard Peatfield and 3 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Interventions to reduce the time to diagnosis of brain tumours.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The diagnosis and treatment of chronic migraine.Therapeutic advances in chronic disease · 2015
    Review
  15. It IS a tumor -- current review of headache and brain tumor.Current pain and headache reports · 2014
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Should GPs have direct access to neuroradiological investigation when adults present with headache?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2011
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 9 institutions in 3 countries.

David P KernickSt Thomas Health Centre, Exeter. su1838@eclipse.co.uk
Fayyaz Ahmed
Anish Bahra
Andrew Dowson
Giles Elrington
Manuela Fontebasso
Nicola J Giffin
Sue Lipscombe
Anne MacGregor
Richard Peatfield
Stuart Weatherby
Tom Whitmarsh
Peter J Goadsby
UCL Australia · AUBarts Health NHS Trust · GBDerriford Hospital · GBEast Harlem Tutorial Program · USImperial College London · GBKing's College Hospital · GBNational Migraine Centre · GBPhillips Exeter Academy · USUniversity of Bath · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The number of referrals by primary care practitioners to secondary care neurology services, particularly for headache, may be difficult to justify. Access to imaging by primary care practitioners could avoid referral without compromising patient outcomes, but the decision to refer is based on a number of complex factors. Due to the paucity of rigorous evidence in this area, available data are combined with expert opinion to offer support for GPs. The study suggests management for three levels of risk of tumour: red flags>1%; orange flags 0.1-1%; and yellow flags<0.1% but above the background population rate of 0.01%. Clinical presentations are stratified into these three groups. Important secondary causes of headache where imaging is normal should not be overlooked, and normal investigation does not eliminate the need for follow-up or appropriate management of headache.

Indexed as

Family PracticePractice Guidelines as TopicBrain NeoplasmsHeadacheHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingProfessional PracticeRisk FactorsSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID19068162
PMCPMC2593538
OpenAlexW1984613793

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.