ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2009
Five misconceptions in cancer diagnosis.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers, 9 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
65 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Early cancer diagnosis and community pharmacies: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Pooled it
- Biomarkers Suitable for Early Detection of Intrathoracic Cancers in Primary Care: A Systematic Review.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Understanding the role of GPs' gut feelings in diagnosing cancer in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing evidence.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020Pooled it
- Decision support tools to improve cancer diagnostic decision making in primary care: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019Pooled it
- Impact of GP gatekeeping on quality of care, and health outcomes, use, and expenditure: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019Pooled it
- Direct access cancer testing in primary care: a systematic review of use and clinical outcomes.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018Pooled it
- Weight loss as a predictor of cancer in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018Pooled it
- The Andersen Model of Total Patient Delay: a systematic review of its application in cancer diagnosis.Journal of health services research & policy · 2012Pooled it
- Implementation of immunochemical faecal occult blood test in general practice: a study protocol using a cluster-randomised stepped-wedge design.BMC cancer · 2016Trial
- The effect of direct access to CT scan in early lung cancer detection: an unblinded, cluster-randomised trial.BMC cancer · 2015Trial
- A geographical cluster randomised stepped wedge study of continuing medical education and cancer diagnosis in general practice.Implementation science : IS · 2014Trial
- 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
- Time Intervals in the Pathway to Diagnosis of Patients with Cancer.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Article
- Deep learning-based identification of patients at increased risk of cancer using routine laboratory markers.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Optimal Pathways to Lung Cancer Screening in Primary Care Settings: A Scoping Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Article
- Psychiatric disorders and the cancer diagnostic process in general practice: a combined questionnaire and register study exploring the patients' experiences in Denmark.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2024Article
- Validation of a diagnostic prediction tool for colorectal cancer: a case-control replication study.Family practice · 2023Article
- Priorities for implementation research on diagnosing cancer in primary care: a consensus process.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Article
5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Much investment has been put into facilities for early cancer diagnosis. It is difficult to know how successful this investment has been. New facilities for rapid investigation in the UK have not reduced mortality, and may cause delays in diagnosis of patients with low-risk, or atypical, symptoms. In part, the failure of new facilities to translate into mortality benefits can be explained by five misconceptions. These are described, along with suggested research and organisational remedies. The first misconception is that cancer is diagnosed in hospitals. Consequently, secondary care data have been used to drive primary care decisions. Second, GPs are thought to be poor at cancer diagnosis, yet the type of education on offer to improve this may not be what is needed. Third, symptomatic cancer diagnosis has been downgraded in importance with the introduction of screening, yet screening identifies only a small minority of cancers. Fourth, pressure is put on GPs to make referrals for those with an individual high risk of cancer - disenfranchising those with 'low-risk but not no-risk' symptoms. Finally, considerable nihilism exists about the value of early diagnosis, despite considerable observational evidence that earlier diagnosis of symptomatic cancer is beneficial.
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.