Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25083137›Full record

ArticleClinical epidemiology2014

Existing data sources for clinical epidemiology: Danish Cancer in Primary Care cohort.

Henry Jensen, Marie Louise Tørring, Mette Bach Larsen, Peter Vedsted

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Association between GPs' suspicion of cancer and patients' usual consultation pattern in primary care: a cross-sectional study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Tumour stage and implementation of standardised cancer patient pathways: a comparative cohort study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2016
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Henry JensenResearch Unit for General Practice, Research Centre for Cancer Diagnosis in Primary Care, Randers NOE, Denmark ; Section for General Medical Practice, Department of Public Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus C, Randers NOE, Denmark.
Marie Louise TørringResearch Unit for General Practice, Research Centre for Cancer Diagnosis in Primary Care, Randers NOE, Denmark.
Mette Bach LarsenDepartment of Public Health Programs, Randers Regional Hospital, Randers NOE, Denmark.
Peter VedstedResearch Unit for General Practice, Research Centre for Cancer Diagnosis in Primary Care, Randers NOE, Denmark.
Aarhus University · DKRegional Hospital Randers · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn this paper, we describe the settings, content, and possibilities of the Danish Cancer in Primary Care (CaP) cohort as well as some of the key findings so far. Further, we describe the future potential of the cohort as an international resource for epidemiological and health services research studies.

methodsThe CaP cohort comprises information from three Danish subcohorts set up in 2004-2005, 2007-2008, and 2010 on newly diagnosed cancer patients aged 18 years or older. General practitioner (GP)-reported and patient-reported data from six questionnaires generated information on causes and consequences of delayed diagnosis of cancer, and these data were supplemented with complete information on, eg, death, migration, health care utilization, medication use, and socioeconomic data from Denmark's comprehensive health and administrative registers. The cohort is followed up in terms of emigration, death, hospitalization, medication, and socioeconomics, and data are updated regularly.

resultsIn total, we identified 22,169 verified incident cancer cases. Completed GP questionnaires were returned for 17,566 (79%) of the verified cases, and patient questionnaires were completed by 8,937 (40%) respondents. Patients with participating GPs did not differ from patients with nonparticipating GPs in regard to one-year survival, comorbidity, or educational level. However, compared with nonparticipating GPs, patients listed with participating GPs were more likely to be women, younger, to have a higher disposable income, to have more regional or distant spread of tumors, were also more likely to have breast cancer, and were less likely to have prostate cancer. Responding patients were more likely to be women, aged 45-74 years, and diagnosed with breast cancer or malignant melanoma, and have higher one-year survival rates, more localized tumors, higher educational background, and higher disposable income.

conclusionThe cohort is an international resource for epidemiological and health service research, and data are accessible for well defined and approved collaborative studies.

Indexed as

cancercohort studiesearly diagnosisepidemiologypublic health

Identifiers

PMID25083137
PMCPMC4108454
OpenAlexW2047362697

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.