ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2016
International variation in adherence to referral guidelines for suspected cancer: a secondary analysis of survey data.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A Bibliometric Analysis and Visualization of Decision Support Systems for Healthcare Referral Strategies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- Variation in the initial assessment and investigation for ovarian cancer in symptomatic women: a systematic review of international guidelines.BMC cancer · 2019Pooled 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
- Evaluating the Time Interval Between Symptoms Onset, Diagnosis, and Therapeutic Intervention in Lung Cancer: A Cross-Sectional Study in Southern Iran.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2024Article
- 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
- Article
- The Role of Smoking Status in Making Risk-Informed Diagnostic Decisions in the Lung Cancer Pathway: A Qualitative Study of Health Care Professionals and Patients.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024Article
- Building the case for the use of gut feelings in cancer referrals: perspectives of patients referred to a non-specific symptoms pathway.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022Article
- 'If I was minister of health'…I would rely on knowing what I do not know.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2021Article
- 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 · 2021Article
- 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
- Time from presentation to pre-diagnostic chest X-ray in patients with symptomatic lung cancer: a cohort study using electronic patient records from English primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2021Article
- Article
- Availability and use of cancer decision-support tools: a cross-sectional survey of UK primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019Article
- Article
- Article
- Development of an intervention to expedite cancer diagnosis through primary care: a protocol.BJGP open · 2018Article
- How long is too long? A scoping review of health system delays in lung cancer.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2018Article
- 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
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVariation in cancer survival persists between comparable nations and appears to be due, in part, to primary care practitioners (PCPs) having different thresholds for acting definitively in response to cancer-related symptoms.
aimTo explore whether cancer guidelines, and adherence to them, differ between jurisdictions and impacts on PCPs' propensity to take definitive action on cancer-related symptoms. DESIGN AND
settingA secondary analysis of survey data from six countries (10 jurisdictions) participating in the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership.
methodPCPs' responses to five clinical vignettes presenting symptoms and signs of lung (n = 2), colorectal (n = 2), and ovarian cancer (n = 1) were compared with investigation and referral recommendations in cancer guidelines.
resultsNine jurisdictions had guidelines covering the two colorectal vignettes. For the lung vignettes, although eight jurisdictions had guidelines for the first, the second was covered by a Swedish guideline alone. Only the UK and Denmark had an ovarian cancer guideline. Survey responses of 2795 PCPs (crude response rate: 12%) were analysed. Guideline adherence ranged from 20-82%. UK adherence was lower than other jurisdictions for the lung vignette covered by the guidance (47% versus 58%; P <0.01) but similar (45% versus 46%) or higher (67% versus 38%; P <0.01) for the two colorectal vignettes. PCPs took definitive action least often when a guideline recommended a non-definitive action or made no recommendation. UK PCPs adhered to recommendations for definitive action less than their counterparts (P <0.01). There wasno association between jurisdictional guideline adherence and 1-year survival.
conclusionCancer guideline content is variable between similarly developed nations and poor guideline adherence does not explain differential survival. Guidelines that fail to cover high-risk presentations or that recommend non-definitive action may reduce definitive diagnostic action.
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.