Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25652803›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2015

Over-reassurance and undersupport after a 'false alarm': a systematic review of the impact on subsequent cancer symptom attribution and help seeking.

Cristina Renzi, Katriina L Whitaker, Jane Wardle

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
8.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Urgent cancer referrals: how well are they working and can they be improved?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2021
    Article
  12. Mapping the spectrum of psychological and behavioural responses to low-dose CT lung cancer screening offered within a Lung Health Check.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Understanding of a negative bowel screening result and potential impact on future symptom appraisal and help-seeking behaviour: a focus group study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2017
    Article
  18. Patient perspectives on delays in diagnosis and treatment of cancer: a qualitative analysis of free-text data.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2017
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Cristina RenziDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, Health Behaviour Research Centre, London, UK.
Katriina L WhitakerDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, Health Behaviour Research Centre, London, UK.
Jane WardleDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, Health Behaviour Research Centre, London, UK.
University College London · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 13276Cancer Research UK 18667Cancer Research UK C48748/A16867
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis literature review examined research into the impact of a previous 'all-clear' or non-cancer diagnosis following symptomatic presentation ('false alarm') on symptom attribution and delays in help seeking for subsequent possible cancer symptoms. DESIGN AND

settingThe comprehensive literature review included original research based on quantitative, qualitative and mixed data collection methods. We used a combination of search strategies, including in-depth searches of electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, PsychInfo), searching key authors and articles listed as 'related' in PubMed, and reference lists. We performed a narrative synthesis of key themes shared across studies.

participantsThe review included studies published after 1990 and before February 2014 reporting information on adult patients having experienced a false alarm following symptomatic presentation. We excluded false alarms in the context of screening. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We evaluated the effect of a 'false alarm' on symptom attribution and help seeking for new or recurrent possible cancer symptoms.

resultsOverall, 1442 papers were screened and 121 retrieved for full-text evaluation. Among them, 19 reported on false alarms and subsequent symptom attribution or help seeking. They used qualitative (n=14), quantitative (n=3) and mixed methods (n=2). Breast (n=7), gynaecological (n=3), colorectal (n=2), testicular (n=2), and head and neck cancers (n=2) were the most studied. Two broad themes emerged underlying delays in help seeking: (1) over-reassurance from the previous 'all-clear' diagnosis leading to subsequent symptoms being interpreted as benign, and (2) unsupportive healthcare experiences in which symptoms were dismissed, leaving patients concerned about appearing hypochondriacal or uncertain about the appropriate next actions. The evidence suggested that the effect of a false alarm can persist for months and even years.

conclusionsIn conclusion, over-reassurance and undersupport of patients after a false alarm can undermine help seeking in the case of new or recurrent potential cancer symptoms, highlighting the need for appropriate patient information when investigations rule out cancer.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsUncertaintyFemaleHumansMaleNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPatient Acceptance of Health CareGENERAL MEDICINE (see Internal Medicine)ONCOLOGYPRIMARY CAREPUBLIC HEALTHQUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Identifiers

PMID25652803
PMCPMC4322204
OpenAlexW2104110698

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.