ArticleBritish journal of cancer2015
Impact of investigations in general practice on timeliness of referral for patients subsequently diagnosed with cancer: analysis of national primary care audit data.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 3 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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Clinical Prediction Models Incorporating Blood Test Trend for Cancer Detection: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Critical Appraisal.JMIR cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Direct access cancer testing in primary care: a systematic review of use and clinical outcomes.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018Pooled it
- Quantifying intervals to diagnosis in myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2018Pooled it
- Variations in the investigation of colorectal cancer-related symptoms in Australian primary care: a retrospective cohort study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Article
- CA125 and age-based models for ovarian cancer detection in primary care: a population-based external validation study.British journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Patterns of diagnostic testing for oesophagogastric cancer-related symptoms in Australian primary care: a retrospective cohort study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Article
- Variation in the use of primary care-led investigations prior to a cancer diagnosis: analysis of the National Cancer Diagnosis Audit.BMJ quality & safety · 2025Article
- The Association between Blood Test Trends and Undiagnosed Cancer: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal.Cancers · 2024Review
- Primary care practitioners' priorities for improving the timeliness of cancer diagnosis in primary care: a European cluster-based analysis.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- BLOod Test Trend for cancEr Detection (BLOTTED): protocol for an observational and prediction model development study using English primary care electronic health record data.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2023Article
- Prehospital care for ovarian cancer in Catalonia: could we do better in primary care? Retrospective cohort study.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Primary Care System Factors and Clinical Decision-making in Patients that Could Have Lung Cancer: a Vignette Study in Five Balkan Region Countries.Zdravstveno varstvo · 2022Article
- Protocol for a feasibility study incorporating a randomised pilot trial with an embedded process evaluation and feasibility economic analysis of ThinkCancer!: a primary care intervention to expedite cancer diagnosis in Wales.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2021Article
- Are Regulations Safe? Reflections From Developing a Digital Cancer Decision-Support Tool.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2021Article
- How European primary care practitioners think the timeliness of cancer diagnosis can be improved: a thematic analysis.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Potential for Reducing Time to Referral for Colorectal Cancer Patients in Primary Care.Annals of family medicine · 2019Article
- The burden of cancer on primary and secondary health care services before and after cancer diagnosis in New South Wales, Australia.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Article
- Responsibility for follow-up during the diagnostic process in primary care: a secondary analysis of International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership data.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018Article
- Reimagining the diagnostic pathway for gastrointestinal cancer.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFor patients with symptoms of possible cancer who do not fulfil the criteria for urgent referral, initial investigation in primary care has been advocated in the United Kingdom and supported by additional resources. The consequence of this strategy for the timeliness of diagnosis is unknown.
methodsWe analysed data from the English National Audit of Cancer Diagnosis in Primary Care on patients with lung (1494), colorectal (2111), stomach (246), oesophagus (513), pancreas (327), and ovarian (345) cancer relating to the ordering of investigations by the General Practitioner and their nature. Presenting symptoms were categorised according to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance on referral for suspected cancer. We used linear regression to estimate the mean difference in primary-care interval by cancer, after adjustment for age, gender, and the symptomatic presentation category.
resultsPrimary-care investigations were undertaken in 3198/5036 (64%) of cases. The median primary-care interval was 16 days (IQR 5-45) for patients undergoing investigation and 0 days (IQR 0-10) for those not investigated. Among patients whose symptoms mandated urgent referral to secondary care according to NICE guidelines, between 37% (oesophagus) and 75% (pancreas) were first investigated in primary care. In multivariable linear regression analyses stratified by cancer site, adjustment for age, sex, and NICE referral category explained little of the observed prolongation associated with investigation.
interpretationFor six specified cancers, investigation in primary care was associated with later referral for specialist assessment. This effect was independent of the nature of symptoms. Some patients for whom urgent referral is mandated by NICE guidance are nevertheless investigated before referral. Reducing the intervals between test order, test performance, and reporting can help reduce the prolongation of primary-care intervals associated with investigation use. Alternative models of assessment should be considered.
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.