Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25734395›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2015

The role of primary care in cancer diagnosis via emergency presentation: qualitative synthesis of significant event reports.

E D Mitchell, G Rubin, L Merriman, U Macleod

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Patient involvement in diagnosing cancer in primary care: a systematic review of current interventions.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Disease-related factors affecting timely lymphoma diagnosis: a qualitative study exploring patient experiences.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019
    Article
  18. Safety netting for primary care: evidence from a literature review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019
    Review
  19. Article
  20. GPs' understanding and practice of safety netting for potential cancer presentations: a qualitative study in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018
    Article
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

4 authors.

E D MitchellCentre for Health Services Research, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Charles Thackrah Building, 101 Clarendon Road, Leeds LS2 9LJ, UK.
G RubinDurham University, School of Medicine, Pharmacy and Health, Wolfson Building, Queen's Campus, University Boulevard, Stockton-on-Tees TS17 6BH, UK.
L MerrimanNorth Derbyshire Clinical Commissioning Group, The Springs Health Centre, Recreation Close, Clowne, Chesterfield S43 4PL, UK.
U MacleodHull York Medical School, University of Hull, Hertford Building, Cottingham Road, Hull HU6 7RX, UK.

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients diagnosed with cancer in the context of an emergency presentation (EP) have poorer outcomes. It is often assumed that such patients present to the emergency department without consulting their general practitioner (GP). Little work has been done to identify primary care involvement before hospital attendance.

methodsParticipating primary care practices completed a significant event audit (SEA) report for the last patient diagnosed with cancer as a result of an EP. Accounts were synthesised and a qualitative approach to analysis undertaken.

resultsSEAs for 222 patients were analysed. A range of cancers were included, the most common being lung (32.4%) and upper gastrointestinal (19.8%). In most cases, patients had contact with their practice before diagnosis, primarily in the period immediately before admission. In only eight cases had there been no input from primary care. Accounts of protracted primary care contact generally demonstrated complexity, often related to comorbidity, patient-mediated factors or reassurance provided by negative investigations. Learning points identified by practices centred on the themes of presentation and diagnosis, consultation and safety-netting, communication and system issues, patient factors and referral guidelines.

conclusionsThere is extensive primary care input into patients whose diagnosis results from EP, and for the most part potential 'delay' in referral can be reasonably explained by the complexity of the presentation or by coexisting patient factors.

Indexed as

EmergenciesEmergency Service, HospitalGeneral PracticePrimary Health CareAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildFemaleGastrointestinal NeoplasmsGenital Neoplasms, FemaleHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID25734395
PMCPMC4385976

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.