Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22909280›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2012

Diagnosis delay in Libyan female breast cancer.

Eramah Ermiah, Fathi Abdalla, Abdelbaset Buhmeida, Entesar Larbesh, Seppo Pyrhönen, Yrjö Collan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 77 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
77citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

77 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Applying a Novel Measure of Community-Level Healthcare Access to Assess Breast Cancer Care Timeliness.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

17 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Eramah ErmiahDepartment of Oncology, University of Turku, Turku, Finland. eelramah@yahoo.com
Fathi Abdalla
Abdelbaset Buhmeida
Entesar Larbesh
Seppo Pyrhönen
Yrjö Collan

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo study the diagnosis delay and its impact on stage of disease among women with breast cancer on Libya.

methods200 women, aged 22 to 75 years with breast cancer diagnosed during 2008-2009 were interviewed about the period from the first symptoms to the final histological diagnosis of breast cancer. This period (diagnosis time) was categorized into 3 periods: <3 months, 3-6 months, and >6 months. If diagnosis time was longer than 3 months, the diagnosis was considered delayed (diagnosis delay). Consultation time was the time taken to visit the general practitioner after the first symptoms. Retrospective preclinical and clinical data were collected on a form (questionnaire) during an interview with each patient and from medical records.

resultsThe median of diagnosis time was 7.5 months. Only 30.0% of patients were diagnosed within 3 months after symptoms. 14% of patients were diagnosed within 3-6 months and 56% within a period longer than 6 months. A number of factors predicted diagnosis delay: Symptoms were not considered serious in 27% of patients. Alternative therapy (therapy not associated with cancer) was applied in 13.0% of the patients. Fear and shame prevented the visit to the doctor in 10% and 4.5% of patients, respectively. Inappropriate reassurance that the lump was benign was an important reason for prolongation of the diagnosis time. Diagnosis delay was associated with initial breast symptom(s) that did not include a lump (p < 0.0001), with women who did not report monthly self examination (p < 0.0001), with old age (p = 0.004), with illiteracy (p = 0.009), with history of benign fibrocystic disease (p = 0.029) and with women who had used oral contraceptive pills longer than 5 years (p = 0.043). At the time of diagnosis, the clinical stage distribution was as follows: 9.0% stage I, 25.5% stage II, 54.0% stage III and 11.5% stage IV.Diagnosis delay was associated with bigger tumour size (p <0.0001), with positive lymph nodes (N2, N3; p < 0.0001), with high incidence of late clinical stages (p < 0.0001), and with metastatic disease (p < 0.0001).

conclusionsDiagnosis delay is very serious problem in Libya. Diagnosis delay was associated with complex interactions between several factors and with advanced stages. There is a need for improving breast cancer awareness and training of general practitioners to reduce breast cancer mortality by promoting early detection. The treatment guidelines should pay more attention to the early phases of breast cancer. Especially, guidelines for good practices in managing detectable of tumors are necessary.

Indexed as

Delayed DiagnosisAdultAgedBreast NeoplasmsChi-Square DistributionClinical CompetenceCultural CharacteristicsEarly Detection of CancerFearFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansLibyaLymphatic MetastasisMiddle AgedNeoplasm Staging

Identifiers

PMID22909280
PMCPMC3542159

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.