Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25175155›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2014

Cancer suspicion in general practice, urgent referral and time to diagnosis: a population-based GP survey and registry study.

Henry Jensen, Marie Louise Tørring, Frede Olesen, Jens Overgaard, Peter Vedsted

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 105 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
105citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

105 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. A Bibliometric Analysis and Visualization of Decision Support Systems for Healthcare Referral Strategies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. 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
  4. Pooled it
  5. Weight loss as a predictor of cancer in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018
    Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Clinical assessment of recurrent cancer: a Danish cohort study in general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

45 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

5 authors.

Henry JensenResearch Unit for General Practice, Research Centre for Cancer Diagnosis in Primary Care, Department of Public Health, Aarhus University, Bartholins Allé 2, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. henry.jensen@feap.dk.
Marie Louise Tørring
Frede Olesen
Jens Overgaard
Peter Vedsted

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany countries have implemented standardised cancer patient pathways (CPPs) to ensure fast diagnosis of patients suspected of having cancer. Yet, studies are sparse on the impact of such CPPs, and few have distinguished between referral routes. For incident cancer patients, we aimed to determine how often GPs suspected cancer at the time of first presentation of symptoms in general practice and to describe the routes of referral for further investigation. In addition, we aimed to analyse if the GP's suspicion of cancer could predict the choice of referral to a CPP. Finally, we aimed to analyse associations between not only cancer suspicion and time to cancer diagnosis, but also between choice of referral route and time to cancer diagnosis.

methodsWe conducted a population-based, cross-sectional study of incident cancer patients in Denmark who had attended general practice prior to their diagnosis of cancer. Data were collected from GP questionnaires and national registers. We estimated the patients' chance of being referred to a CPP (prevalence ratio (PR)) using Poisson regression. Associations between the GP's symptom interpretation, use of CPP and time to diagnosis were estimated using quantile regression.

results5,581 questionnaires were returned (response rate: 73.8%). A GP was involved in diagnosing the cancer in 4,101 (73.5%) cases (3,823 cases analysed). In 48.2% of these cases, the GP interpreted the patient's symptoms as 'alarm' symptoms suggestive of cancer. The GP used CPPs in 1,426 (37.3%) cases. Patients, who had symptoms interpreted as 'vague' had a lower chance of being referred to a CPP than when interpreted as 'alarm' symptoms (PR = 0.53 (95%CI: 0.48;0.60)). Patients with 'vague' symptoms had a 34 (95% CI: 28;41) days longer median time to diagnosis than patients with 'alarm' symptoms.

conclusionsGPs suspect cancer more often than they initiate a CPP, and patients were less likely to be referred to a CPP when their symptoms were not interpreted as alarm symptoms of cancer. The GP's choice of referral route was a strong predictor of the duration of the diagnostic interval, but the GP's symptom interpretation was approximately twice as strong an indicator of a longer diagnostic interval.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerPractice Patterns, Physicians'AdultAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesDenmarkFemaleGeneral PracticeGeneral PractitionersHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsQuality of Health CareReferral and Consultation

Identifiers

PMID25175155
PMCPMC4164756

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.