Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23336459›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2013

Understanding diagnosis of lung cancer in primary care: qualitative synthesis of significant event audit reports.

Elizabeth D Mitchell, Greg Rubin, Una Macleod

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Factors affecting the decision to investigate older adults with potential cancer symptoms: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Patient involvement in diagnosing cancer in primary care: a systematic review of current interventions.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Factors influencing symptom appraisal and help-seeking of older adults with possible cancer: a mixed-methods systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Estimating lung cancer risk from chest X-ray and symptoms: a prospective cohort study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Development of a tool for coding safety-netting behaviours in primary care: a mixed-methods study using existing UK consultation recordings.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Safety netting in routine primary care consultations: an observational study using video-recorded UK consultations.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019
    Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

3 authors.

Elizabeth D MitchellSocial Dimensions of Health Institute, Universities of Dundee and St Andrews, Dundee, UK. liz.mitchell2@gmail.com
Greg Rubin
Una Macleod

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMost lung cancers present symptomatically, but the pathway to diagnosis in primary care can be complex and is poorly understood. Significant event audit (SEA) is a quality improvement technique widely used in UK general practice.

aimTo gain insights into the diagnostic process for lung cancer, drawn from analysis of SEA documents. DESIGN AND

settingQualitative analysis of SEAs from 92 general practices in the North of England Cancer Network.

methodParticipating practices were provided with a standardised electronic template and asked to undertake a significant event audit related to the most recent diagnosis of lung cancer in the practice, even if that patient had since died. Reported accounts for 132 diagnoses were analysed using a modified framework approach.

resultsMost SEAs demonstrated timely recognition and referral. Where this had taken longer, there were often reasonable explanations, including: chest X-rays reported as normal or with benign findings; patient-mediated factors, such as delay in re-presenting or declining earlier referral; and presentation complicated by comorbidity. Some opportunities for earlier referral were also found. Lessons drawn from these events included limitations of chest X-ray as a diagnostic tool, the need for vigilance in patients with existing morbidity, and the importance of 'safety-netting'.

conclusionQualitative synthesis of SEAs offered considerable value in understanding circumstances surrounding the diagnostic process for lung cancer in primary care. The most common presentation was with cough or other symptoms indicative of infection, and it is by understanding more about these patients in particular that most can be gained.

Indexed as

Medical AuditPrimary Health CareAdultAgedAged, 80 and overDisease ProgressionEnglandFemaleHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisQualitative ResearchReferral and ConsultationReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID23336459
PMCPMC3529291

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.