ArticleBMC cancer2019
Achieving a timely diagnosis for teenagers and young adults with cancer: the ACE "too young to get cancer?" study.
Article in BMC cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions to reduce the time to diagnosis of brain tumours.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- "I never thought to bring them up to the doctor": examining symptom appraisal, help-seeking behaviors, and diagnostic delays among young adults with cancer.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Intervals in Children, Adolescents and Young Adults with Primary Bone Sarcoma: A Systematic Review.Cancers · 2026Review
- Use of healthcare services and prescription medication prior to sarcoma diagnosis in children, adolescents, and young adults in 1997-2020: a population-based cohort study.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Article
- Review
- Article
- Associations between diagnostic time intervals and health-related quality of life, clinical anxiety and depression in adolescents and young adults with cancer: cross-sectional analysis of the BRIGHTLIGHT cohort.British journal of cancer · 2022Article
- Socioeconomic position and prediagnostic health care contacts in children with cancer in Denmark: a nationwide register study.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- Perceived barriers to seeking cancer care in the Gaza Strip: a cross-sectional study.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Association of Self-reported Presenting Symptoms With Timeliness of Help-Seeking Among Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer in the BRIGHTLIGHT Study.JAMA network open · 2020Article
- The support and information needs of adolescents and young adults with cancer when active treatment ends.BMC cancer · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTime to diagnosis (TTD) concerns teenagers and young adults (TYA) with cancer and may affect outcome.
methodsHealthcare records from 105 TYA in a regional cancer service were assessed to document events from 1st symptom to treatment start. Detailed pathway construction was possible for 104 patients and allowed a multidisciplinary panel review of each pathway with assessment of good practice and lessons for the future.
results1st presentation was to primary care in 86, and 93% consulted in primary care before diagnosis. Routes to Diagnosis were 45% via urgent 2 Week Wait pathways and 38% as emergency referrals. Total Interval (time from 1st presentation to treatment start) was median 63 (range 1-559) days, varying within/between diagnoses. Patient interval (time from 1st symptom to 1st presentation) was longest for lymphoma, carcinoma and bone tumour (medians: 9, 12, 20 days). Overall, time in primary care was short (median 3, range 0-537 days) compared to secondary care (median 29, range 0-195 days) and longest for lymphoma, carcinoma, brain/CNS (medians: 10, 15, 16 days). Specialist Care interval (time from 1st specialist visit to treatment start) was longest for bone, brain/CNS, lymphoma, carcinoma (medians: 30, 33, 36, 48 days). 40% pathways were rated as showing good/best practice but 16% were less than satisfactory. Continued safety-netting/support was identified from primary care but analysis suggested opportunities for improvement in transition through secondary care.
conclusionsPrevious reports of prolonged TTD have focused on delay in referral from primary care but this study suggests that this might be reduced by optimising management in secondary care.
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.