ArticlePloS one2014
Attributions of cancer 'alarm' symptoms in a community sample.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 35 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
35 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review of factors associated with the patient and diagnostic intervals in gastric cancer.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation of a targeted cancer awareness intervention for adults living in deprived areas of the UK.British journal of cancer · 2021Trial
- Diagnostic process of cancer in a health system without gatekeeping: a single centre survey analysis.Primary health care research & development · 2024Article
- Article
- Associations between smoking status and involvement of personal and professional relations among individuals reporting symptoms related to a diagnosis of lung cancer: a population-based study.BMC public health · 2022Article
- The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Diagnosis of Skin Cancer Cases in North Cancer Alliance and Scotland.Cureus · 2022Article
- The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Cancer Patient's Management-Lithuanian Cancer Center Experience.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Cancer symptom experience and help-seeking behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: a cross-sectional population survey.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Predictive values for different cancers and inflammatory bowel disease of 6 common abdominal symptoms among more than 1.9 million primary care patients in the UK: A cohort study.PLoS medicine · 2021Article
- Short-term outcomes of a COVID-adapted triage pathway for colorectal cancer detection.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2021Article
- Colorectal cancer screening in the COVID-19 era.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2021Review
- The forgotten victims of the COVID-19 pandemic.Digestive and liver disease : official journal of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology and the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver · 2020Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the symptomatic diagnosis of cancer: the view from primary care.The Lancet. Oncology · 2020Article
- Influence of doctor-patient conversations on behaviours of patients presenting to primary care with new or persistent symptoms: a video observation study.BMJ quality & safety · 2020Observational
- Article
- Beliefs that contribute to delays in diagnosis of prostate cancer among Afro-Caribbean men in Trinidad and Tobago.Psycho-oncology · 2019Article
- The nature and frequency of abdominal symptoms in cancer patients and their associations with time to help-seeking: evidence from a national audit of cancer diagnosis.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2018Article
- Screening for red flag symptoms of cancer: A community-based cross-sectional study from urban Puducherry, India.Journal of education and health promotion · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAttribution of early cancer symptoms to a non-serious cause may lead to longer diagnostic intervals. We investigated attributions of potential cancer 'alarm' and non-alarm symptoms experienced in everyday life in a community sample of adults, without mention of a cancer context.
methodsA questionnaire was mailed to 4858 adults (≥50 years old, no cancer diagnosis) through primary care, asking about symptom experiences in the past 3 months. The word cancer was not mentioned. Target 'alarm' symptoms, publicised by Cancer Research UK, were embedded in a longer symptom list. For each symptom experienced, respondents were asked for their attribution ('what do you think caused it'), concern about seriousness ('not at all' to 'extremely'), and help-seeking ('did you contact a doctor about it': Yes/No).
resultsThe response rate was 35% (n = 1724). Over half the respondents (915/1724; 53%) had experienced an 'alarm' symptom, and 20 (2%) cited cancer as a possible cause. Cancer attributions were highest for 'unexplained lump'; 7% (6/87). Cancer attributions were lowest for 'unexplained weight loss' (0/47). A higher proportion (375/1638; 23%) were concerned their symptom might be 'serious', ranging from 12% (13/112) for change in a mole to 41% (100/247) for unexplained pain. Just over half had contacted their doctor about their symptom (59%), although this varied by symptom. Alarm symptoms were appraised as more serious than non-alarm symptoms, and were more likely to trigger help-seeking.
conclusionsConsistent with retrospective reports from cancer patients, 'alarm' symptoms experienced in daily life were rarely attributed to cancer. These results have implications for understanding how people appraise and act on symptoms that could be early warning signs of cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.