ArticleBMC health services research2018
The Aarhus statement on cancer diagnostic research: turning recommendations into new survey instruments.
Article in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 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
31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Psychosocial influences on help-seeking behaviour for cancer in low-income and lower middle-income countries: a mixed-methods systematic review.BMJ global health · 2021Pooled it
- Health System Factors in Head and Neck Cancer Diagnosis: A HEADSpAcE Consortium Qualitative Study in Glasgow and Montevideo.Head & neck · 2026Article
- Overseas Care and Cancer Survivorship in Small Island Developing States of the Eastern Caribbean: Protocol for a Multicountry Mixed Methods Study (CaSIDEC Study).JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Later-Stage Diagnosis and Poorer Survival in Pancreatic Cancer Patients With Vague Symptoms: A Population-Based Study.United European gastroenterology journal · 2026Article
- An Analysis of the Timeline to Diagnosis and Treatment in Oral Cavity and Oropharynx Cancer.Oral diseases · 2026Article
- Article
- Time to diagnosis for breast, cervical and colorectal cancer in Zimbabwe and South Africa: a cross-sectional study.BMJ global health · 2026Article
- Patients' perceptions on reasons for self-referring to the emergency department shortly before a cancer diagnosis: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Article
- Advanced Stage Head and Neck Cancer Diagnosis: HEADSpAcE Consortium Health Systems Benchmarking Survey.Head & neck · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Delay in Soft Tissue Sarcomas: A Review.Cancers · 2025Review
- Diagnosis of cancer in the South and North of Nigeria: duration and causes of delay.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- 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 · 2024Article
- Determining diagnostic delays in Romanian multiple myeloma patients using the Aarhus statement.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Factors influencing the timeliness of care for patients with lung cancer in Bangladesh.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Article
- Prehospital care for ovarian cancer in Catalonia: could we do better in primary care? Retrospective cohort study.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Morbidity and measures of the diagnostic process in primary care for patients subsequently diagnosed with cancer.Family practice · 2022Article
- Article
- Healthcare practices that increase the quality of care in cancer trajectories from a general practice perspective: a scoping review.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2022Article
- Diagnostic delay of oral squamous cell carcinoma and the fear of diagnosis: A scoping review.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOver recent years there has been a growth in cancer early diagnosis (ED) research, which requires valid measurement of routes to diagnosis and diagnostic intervals. The Aarhus Statement, published in 2012, provided methodological guidance to generate valid data on these key pre-diagnostic measures. However, there is still a wide variety of measuring instruments of varying quality in published research. In this paper we test comprehension of self-completion ED questionnaire items, based on Aarhus Statement guidance, and seek input from patients, GPs and ED researchers to refine these questions.
methodsWe used personal interviews and consensus approaches to generate draft ED questionnaire items, then a combination of focus groups and telephone interviews to test comprehension and obtain feedback. A framework analysis approach was used, to identify themes and potential refinements to the items.
resultsWe found that many of the questionnaire items still prompted uncertainty in respondents, in both routes to diagnosis and diagnostic interval measurement. Uncertainty was greatest in the context of multiple or vague symptoms, and potentially ambiguous time-points (such as 'date of referral').
conclusionsThere are limits on the validity of self-completion questionnaire responses, and refinements to the wording of questions may not be able to completely overcome these limitations. It's important that ED researchers use the best identifiable measuring instruments, but accommodate inevitable uncertainty in the interpretation of their results. Every effort should be made to increase clarity of questions and responses, and use of two or more data sources should be considered.
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.