Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26892589›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2016

Factors related to breast cancer detection mode and time to diagnosis in Alberta, Canada: a population-based retrospective cohort study.

Yan Yuan, Maoji Li, Jing Yang, Tracy Elliot, Kelly Dabbs, James A Dickinson, Stacey Fisher, Marcy Winget

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Breast cancer detection method, diagnostic interval and use of specialized diagnostic assessment units across Ontario, Canada.Health promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice · 2018
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

8 authors.

Yan YuanSchool of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 1C9, Canada.
Maoji LiSchool of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 1C9, Canada.
Jing YangCancer Control Alberta, Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, Alberta, T5J 3H1, Canada.
Tracy ElliotDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 2T9, Canada.
Kelly DabbsDepartment of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 1C9, Canada.
James A DickinsonFamily Medicine and Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4N1, Canada.
Stacey FisherSchool of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 1C9, Canada.
Marcy WingetDivison of General Medical Disciplines, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA. mwinget@stanford.edu.

Funding

OLFACTORY RECEPTORSF32DC000190 · NIDCD · CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI ZHANG, YINONG · 1995 to 1998
–
Canadian Institutes of Health Research DC0190GPNIDCD NIH HHS F32 DC000190
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnderstanding the factors affecting the mode and timeliness of breast cancer diagnosis is important to optimizing patient experiences and outcomes. The purposes of the study were to identify factors related to the length of the diagnostic interval and assess how they vary by mode of diagnosis: screen or symptom detection.

methodsAll female residents of Alberta diagnosed with first primary breast cancer in years 2004-2010 were identified from the Alberta Cancer Registry. Data were linked to Physician Claims and screening program databases. Screen-detected patients were identified as having a screening mammogram within 6-months prior to diagnosis; remaining patients were considered symptom-detected. Separate quantile regression was conducted for each detection mode to assess the relationship between demographic/clinical and healthcare factors.

resultsOverall, 38 % of the 12,373 breast cancer cases were screen-detected compared to 47 % of the screen-eligible population. Health region of residence was strongly associated with cancer detection mode. The median diagnostic interval for screen and symptom-detected cancers was 19 and 21 days, respectively. The variation by health region, however, was large ranging from an estimated median of 4 to 37 days for screen-detected patients and from 17 to 33 days for symptom-detected patients. Cancer stage was inversely associated with the diagnostic interval for symptom-detected cancers, but not for screen-detected cancers.

conclusionSignificant variation by health region in both the percentage of women with screen-detected cancer and the length of the diagnostic interval for screen and symptom-detected breast cancers suggests there could be important differences in local breast cancer diagnostic care coordination.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAge DistributionAlbertaBreast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMammographyMass ScreeningMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingResearch DesignRetrospective StudiesTime-to-Treatment

Identifiers

PMID26892589
PMCPMC4759735

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.