ArticleEuropean journal of cancer care2019
Correspondence between primary and secondary care about patients with cancer: A qualitative mixed-methods analysis.
Article in European journal of cancer care, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- What helps or hinders the communication of poor prognosis between secondary and primary care? A systematic review with narrative synthesis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Pooled it
- Patient experiences with collaborative practices between primary and specialized care in Norwegian cancer pathways: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- "Ultimately, You Realize You're on Your Own": The Impact of Prostate Cancer on Gay and Bisexual Men Couples.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Cumulative burden of 144 conditions, critical care hospitalisation and premature mortality across 26 adult cancers.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Views of breast cancer survivors on work participation guidance by general practitioners: a qualitative study.BMC primary care · 2022Article
- Quality of hospital discharge letters for patients at the end of life: A retrospective medical record review.European journal of cancer care · 2022Article
- Correspondence between primary and secondary care about patients with cancer: a Delphi consensus study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2019Article
- Correspondence between primary and secondary care about patients with cancer: A qualitative mixed-methods analysis.European journal of cancer care · 2019Article
- Characteristics of Optimal Cancer Referrals Made by Primary Care Clinicians: Scoping Review.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Cancer care is complex and involves many different healthcare providers, especially during diagnosis and initial treatment, and it has been reported that both general practitioners and oncology specialists experience difficulties with interdisciplinary communication. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore information sharing between primary and secondary care for patients with lung, breast or colorectal cancer. A qualitative content analysis of 50 medical files (419 documents) was performed, which identified 70 correspondence-related items. Six main topics were identified in most referral letters from primary to secondary care, but it was particularly notable that highly relevant information regarding the past medical history was often mixed with less relevant information. To lesser extents, the same held true for the medication list and presenting history. In the letters from specialists, nine topics were identified in most letters. Although information about actual treatment was always present, only limited detail, if any, was given about the intent of the treatment (curative or palliative) or the treatment alternatives. Interviews with nine healthcare providers confirmed these issues. These findings indicate that neither the initial referral nor the specialist correspondence is tailored to the needs of the recipient.
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.