SynthesisCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2014
Systematic review of guidelines for the management of suspected lung cancer in primary care.
Synthesis in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Guideline for referral of patients with suspected lung cancer by family physicians and other primary care providers.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2014Pooled it
- Development and Implementation of a Digital Quality Measure of Emergency Cancer Diagnosis.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo systematically review the literature and provide an update and integration of existing peer-reviewed guidelines with recent systematic reviews and with primary studies related to the early recognition and management of lung cancer in primary care. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for relevant articles. The quality of the evidence to support existing guideline recommendations, and the consistency of recommendations with updated evidence, were assessed. Applicability in a Canadian primary care setting was also evaluated. STUDY SELECTION: All studies that explored signs or symptoms of or risk factors for lung cancer in the primary care setting were included. All diagnostic studies in which symptomatic primary care patients underwent 1 or more investigations were also searched. SYNTHESIS: Recommendations were consistent among guidelines despite a paucity of supporting evidence. Updated evidence provided further support for the recommendations. Recommendations for identifying signs and symptoms of lung cancer presenting in primary care and for initial management can be adopted and applied within a Canadian primary care setting.
conclusionThis updated review of recommendations might help promote evidence-based practice and, ultimately, more timely management and improved prognosis for lung cancer patients. It might also assist in the development of lung cancer diagnostic assessment programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25122830PMC4131976What 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.