Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30455220›Full record

SynthesisThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2019

Diagnosis and referral delays in primary care for oral squamous cell cancer: a systematic review.

Ciaran Grafton-Clarke, Kai Wen Chen, Jane Wilcock

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

61 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Patient delay in oral cancer in North-Western Spain: Where do we stand?Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 2026
    Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Ciaran Grafton-ClarkeNorthampton General Hospital, Northampton.
Kai Wen ChenNorthampton General Hospital, Northampton.
Jane WilcockSchool of Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, and GP, Silverdale Medical Practice, Swinton, Salford, Greater Manchester, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe incidence of oral cancer is increasing. Guidance for oral cancer from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is unique in recommending cross-primary care referral from GPs to dentists.

aimThis review investigates knowledge about delays in the diagnosis of symptomatic oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) in primary care. DESIGN AND

settingAn independent multi-investigator literature search strategy and an analysis of study methodologies using a modified data extraction tool based on Aarhus checklist criteria relevant to primary care.

methodThe authors conducted a focused systematic review involving document retrieval from five databases up to March 2018. Included were studies looking at OSCC diagnosis from when patients first accessed primary care up to referral, including length of delay and stage of disease at time of definitive diagnosis.

resultsFrom 538 records, 16 articles were eligible for full-text review. In the UK, more than 55% of patients with OSCC were referred by their GP, and 44% by their dentist. Rates of prescribing between dentists and GPs were similar, and both had similar delays in referral, though one study found greater delays attributed to dentists as they had undertaken dental procedures. On average, patients had two to three consultations before referral. Less than 50% of studies described the primary care aspect of referral in detail. There was no information on inter-GP-dentist referrals.

conclusionThere is a need for primary care studies on OSCC diagnosis. There was no evidence that GPs performed less well than dentists, which calls into question the NICE cancer option to refer to dentists, particularly in the absence of robust auditable pathways.

Indexed as

Primary Health CareCarcinoma, Squamous CellClinical ProtocolsDatabases, FactualDelayed DiagnosisHumansMouth NeoplasmsReferral and ConsultationTime FactorsTime-to-Treatmentdentistsdiagnostic delaygeneral practitionersoral cancerprofessional delayreferralsquamous cell cancer

Identifiers

PMID30455220
PMCPMC6355296

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.