ArticleWorld journal of surgery2010
Was there shortening of the interval between diagnosis and treatment of colorectal cancer in southern Netherlands between 2005 and 2008?
Article in World journal of surgery, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Conflicting Guidelines: A Systematic Review on the Proper Interval for Colorectal Cancer Treatment.World journal of surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Reorganizing the Multidisciplinary Team Meetings in a Tertiary Centre for Gastro-Intestinal Oncology Adds Value to the Internal and Regional Care Pathways. A Mixed Method Evaluation.International journal of integrated care · 2021Article
- Estimating and validating disability-adjusted life years at the global level: a methodological framework for cancer.BMC medical research methodology · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Dutch Cancer Society proposed that the interval between diagnosis and start of treatment should be less than 15 working days. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the interval from diagnosis to treatment for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) shortened between 2005 and 2008 in hospitals in southern Netherlands.
methodsPatients with CRC diagnosed in six hospitals in southern Netherlands during January to December in 2005 (n = 445) and January to July in 2008 (n = 353) were included. The time between diagnosis and start of treatment was assessed, and the proportion of patients treated within the recommended time (<15 working days) was calculated.
resultsThe time to treatment for colon cancer patients was 13 working days in 2005 and 17 working days in 2008. For rectal cancer patients, the median time to preoperative radiotherapy was 28 working days in 2005 and 30 working days in 2008, and the median time to surgical treatment for rectal cancer patients was 26 working days in 2005 and 18 working days in 2008. Time to treatment did not shorten between 2005 and 2008 for colon and rectal cancer patients, except for rectal cancer patients who underwent surgery as initial treatment in patients aged >70 years and those with stage I disease. Substantial variation was seen among hospitals.
conclusionsTime to treatment for patients with CRC in southern Netherlands did not shorten between 2005 and 2008. The time to treatment should be reduced to meet the advice of the Dutch Cancer Society.
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.