Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30265316›Full record

SynthesisFamily practice2019

The use, quality and effectiveness of pelvic examination in primary care for the detection of gynaecological cancer: a systematic review.

Pauline Williams, Peter Murchie, Maggie E Cruickshank, Christine M Bond, Christopher D Burton

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Family practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 48% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Pauline WilliamsAcademic Primary Care, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Peter MurchieAcademic Primary Care, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Maggie E CruickshankUniversity Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Christine M BondAcademic Primary Care, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Christopher D BurtonAcademic Unit of Primary Care, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
University of Aberdeen · GBUniversity of Sheffield · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office CAF/15/03Chief Scientist Office RG13111-10
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUrgent suspected cancer referral guidelines recommend that women with gynaecological cancer symptoms should have a pelvic examination (PE) prior to referral. We do not know to what extent GPs comply, their competency at PE, or if PE shortens the diagnostic interval.

objectivesWe conducted a systematic review of the use, quality and effectiveness of PE in primary care for women with suspected gynaecological cancer.

methodPRISMA guidelines were followed. Three databases were searched using four terms: PE, primary care, competency and gynaecological cancer. Citation lists of all identified papers were screened independently for eligibility by two reviewers. Data extraction was performed in duplicate and independently. Paper quality was assessed using the relevant Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Emergent themes and contrasting issues were explored in a narrative ecological synthesis. MAIN

findingsTwenty papers met the inclusion criteria. 52% or less of women with suspicious symptoms had a PE. No papers directly explored GPs' competence at performing PE. Pre-referral PE was associated with reduced diagnostic delay and earlier stage diagnosis. Ecological synthesis demonstrated a complex interplay between patient and practitioner factors and the environment in which examination is performed. Presenting symptoms are commonly misattributed by patients and practitioners resulting in misdiagnosis and lack of PE.

conclusionWe do not know if pre-referral PE leads to better outcomes for patients. PE is often not performed for women with gynaecological cancer symptoms, and evidence that it may result in earlier stage of diagnosis is weak. More research is needed.

Indexed as

Delayed DiagnosisPrimary Health CareFemaleGenital Neoplasms, FemaleGuideline AdherenceGynecological ExaminationHumansGPgynaecological cancerPEreferral

Identifiers

PMID30265316
PMCPMC6669035
OpenAlexW2892665689

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.