Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26917657›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2016

Pre-referral GP consultations in patients subsequently diagnosed with rarer cancers: a study of patient-reported data.

Silvia C Mendonca, Gary A Abel, Georgios Lyratzopoulos

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

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 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 3 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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. A Bibliometric Analysis and Visualization of Decision Support Systems for Healthcare Referral Strategies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Diagnostic trajectories of patients with rare cancer in the Netherlands: results from a nationwide cross-sectional survey.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  12. Clinical activity in general practice before sarcoma diagnosis: an Australian cohort study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. 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 · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Associations of Symptom Clusters and Health Outcomes in Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer: A Report From the St Jude Lifetime Cohort Study.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023
    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

3 authors.

Silvia C MendoncaCambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge.
Gary A AbelCambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge.
Georgios LyratzopoulosCancer Research UK Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London.

Funding

Cancer Research UK 18180Cancer Research UK A18180
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSome patients with cancer experience multiple pre-diagnostic consultations in primary care, leading to longer time intervals to specialist investigations and diagnosis. Patients with rarer cancers are thought to be at higher risk of such events, but concrete evidence of this is lacking.

aimTo examine the frequency and predictors of repeat consultations with GPs in patients with rarer cancers. DESIGN AND

settingPatient-reported data on pre-referral consultations from three English national surveys of patients with cancer (2010, 2013, and 2014), pooled to maximise the sample size of rarer cancers.

methodThe authors examined the frequency and crude and adjusted odds ratios for ≥3 (versus 1-2) pre-referral consultations by age, sex, ethnicity, level of deprivation, and cancer diagnosis (38 diagnosis groups, including 12 rarer cancers without prior relevant evidence).

resultsAmong 7838 patients with 12 rarer cancers, crude proportions of patients with ≥3 pre-referral consultations ranged from >30.0% to 60.0% for patients with small intestine, bone sarcoma, liver, gallbladder, cancer of unknown primary, soft-tissue sarcoma, and ureteric cancer. The range was 15.0-30.0% for patients with oropharyngeal, anal, parotid, penile, and oral cancer. The overall proportion of responders with any cancer who had ≥3 consultations was 23.4%. Multivariable logistic regression indicated concordant patterns, with strong evidence for variation between rarer cancers (P <0.001).

conclusionPatients with rarer cancers experience pre-referral consultations at frequencies suggestive of middle-to-high diagnostic difficulty. The findings can guide the development of new diagnostic interventions and 'safety-netting' approaches for symptomatic presentations encountered in patients with rarer cancers.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerGeneral PractitionersPrimary Health CareReferral and ConsultationAge FactorsDelayed DiagnosisHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansMedical AuditNeoplasmsPractice Patterns, Physicians'PrognosisRare DiseasesReview Literature as TopicTime FactorsUnited Kingdomconsultationdiagnosisinvestigationneoplasmprimary carereferral

Identifiers

PMID26917657
PMCPMC4758496

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.