Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29151441›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2017

Patients' initial steps to cancer diagnosis in Denmark, England and Sweden: what can a qualitative, cross-country comparison of narrative interviews tell us about potentially modifiable factors?

John MacArtney, Marlene Malmström, Trine Overgaard Nielsen, Julie Evans, Britt-Marie Bernhardson, Senada Hajdarevic, Alison Chapple, Lars E Eriksson, Louise Locock, Birgit Rasmussen and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

14 authors.

John MacArtneyHealth Experiences Research Group, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Marlene MalmströmThe Institute for Palliative Care, Lund University and Region Skåne, Lund, Sweden.
Trine Overgaard NielsenResearch Centre for Cancer Diagnosis in Primary Care, Research Unit of General Practice, Aarhus Universitet, Aarhus, Denmark.
Julie EvansHealth Experiences Research Group, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Britt-Marie BernhardsonDepartment of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Senada HajdarevicDepartment of Nursing, Umeå University, Sweden.
Alison ChappleHealth Experiences Research Group, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Lars E ErikssonDepartment of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Louise LocockHealth Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen.
Birgit RasmussenThe Institute for Palliative Care, Lund University and Region Skåne, Lund, Sweden.
Peter VedstedResearch Centre for Cancer Diagnosis in Primary Care, Research Unit of General Practice, Aarhus Universitet, Aarhus, Denmark.
Carol TishelmanDepartment of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Rikke Sand AndersenResearch Centre for Cancer Diagnosis in Primary Care, Research Unit of General Practice, Aarhus Universitet, Aarhus, Denmark.
Sue ZieblandHealth Experiences Research Group, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Funding

Cancer Research UK 17663
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo illuminate patterns observed in International Cancer Benchmarking Programme studies by extending understanding of the various influences on presentation and referral with cancer symptoms.

designCross-country comparison of Denmark, England and Sweden with qualitative analysis of in-depth interview accounts of the prediagnostic process in lung or bowel cancer.

participants155 women and men, aged between 35 and 86 years old, diagnosed with lung or bowel cancer in 6 months before interview.

settingParticipants recruited through primary and secondary care, social media and word of mouth. Interviews collected by social scientists or nurse researchers during 2015, mainly in participants' homes.

resultsParticipants reported difficulties in interpreting diffuse bodily sensations and symptoms and deciding when to consult. There were examples of swift referrals by primary care professionals in all three countries. In all countries, participants described difficulty deciding if and when to consult, highlighting concerns about access to general practitioner appointments and overstretched primary care services, although this appears less prominent in the Swedish data. It was not unusual for there to be more than one consultation before referral and we noted two distinct patterns of repeated consultation: (1) situations where the participant left the primary care consultation with a plan of action about what should happen next; (2) participants were unclear about under which conditions to return to the doctors. This second pattern sometimes extended over many weeks during which patients described uncertainty, and sometimes frustration, about if and when they should return and whether there were any other feasible investigations. The latter pattern appeared more evident in the interviews in England and Denmark than Sweden.

conclusionWe suggest that if clear action plans, as part of safety netting, were routinely used in primary care consultations then uncertainty, false reassurance and the inefficiency and distress of multiple consultations could be reduced.

Indexed as

EmotionsHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePrimary Health CareReferral and ConsultationUncertaintyAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Cultural ComparisonDenmarkEnglandFemaleGeneral PractitionersHealth Services AccessibilityHumansIntestinal Neoplasmsinternational health servicesprimary carequalitative research

Identifiers

PMID29151441
PMCPMC5702025

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.