ArticleBritish journal of cancer2015
Cancer detection in primary care: insights from general practitioners.
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 57 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
57 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Association of frailty and mortality risk in community-dwelling older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 59 international prospective cohort studies.BMC public health · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Understanding the role of GPs' gut feelings in diagnosing cancer in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing evidence.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020Pooled it
- Breast cancer screening in Europe and the role of general practitioners: A 32-country comparative survey.The European journal of general practice · 2026Article
- Primary healthcare providers' strategies of handling patients presenting with potential cancer symptoms following the introduction of standardized cancer patient pathways in Sweden.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- What influences the decision by primary care doctors to recommend cancer screening? A qualitative evidence synthesis.BMJ open · 2026Review
- Standardized care pathway reshaped the diagnostic and therapeutic landscape of urinary bladder cancer. A 15-year population-based study.BJUI compass · 2026Article
- Quality of Cancer-Related Clinical Coding in Primary Care in North Central London: Mixed Methods Quality Improvement Project.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- GP referral to rapid diagnostic centres for non-specific cancer symptoms: a qualitative study.BJGP open · 2025Article
- Challenges, Difficulties, and Delayed Diagnosis of Multiple Myeloma.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- General practitioners' clinical decision-making in patients that could have cancer: a vignette study comparing the Baltic states with four Nordic countries.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2025Article
- Pathways to myeloproliferative neoplasm presentation and time to diagnosis: results from a cross-sectional study.BJGP open · 2025Article
- Analysis of the European Union's National Cancer Control Programs: Meeting the Needs of People with Intellectual Disabilities.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Patterns of Treatment Delay in Patients with Symptomatic Metastatic Epidural Spinal Cord Compression.Cancers · 2025Article
- GP referrals for suspected cancer in Ireland: protocol for a cross-sectional study (GRACCHUS).HRB open research · 2025Article
- Hidden systems in primary care cancer detection: an embedded qualitative intervention development study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024Article
- Understanding GPs' referral decisions for younger patients with symptoms of cancer: a qualitative interview study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024Article
- Protocol to develop a specialised curriculum in primary care cancer research in an Irish medical school.HRB open research · 2024Article
- Article
- Exploring why European primary care physicians sometimes do not think of, or act on, a possible cancer diagnosis. A qualitative study.BJGP open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGeneral practitioners (GPs) have a key role in cancer detection as the usual first point of contact for patients with potential cancer symptoms. Nevertheless, there is limited work that investigates their perceptions of their role in the early detection of cancer. To address this gap, we aimed to gain an in-depth understanding of cancer diagnosis from the perspective of GPs.
methodsIndividual face-to-face semi-structured interviews were conducted with 55 GPs from the North and North East of England and Greater London. All interviews were recorded and professionally transcribed verbatim. Repeated reading and co-coding engendered systematic thematic analysis across the interview material.
resultsThree main themes emerged from the analysis of our data. First, we identified the burden of early cancer detection in general practice, both related to the anxiety and symptoms patients bring to GPs and the need for GPs to recognise patterns of cancer symptoms and refer appropriately; second, this burden is intensified by a perceived fragmentation of services within the National Health Service (NHS); and third, it is made more complex by the interface between general practice and public health.
conclusionsGPs occupy a challenging but pivotal role in cancer detection. It is crucial that this role be supported by policy and research.
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.