ArticleBMJ open2019
Patient-physician relationship and use of gut feeling in cancer diagnosis in primary care: a cross-sectional survey of patients and their general practitioners.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Understanding the role of GPs' gut feelings in diagnosing cancer in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing evidence.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020Pooled it
- Article
- Psychosocial Determinants Among Hospital and Primary Healthcare Professionals Towards Cancer and Cancer Patients in Croatia.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Physicians' appraisal of parental concerns: a qualitative assessment.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Article
- Association Between Physician Empathy and Difficult Patient Encounters: a Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2023Article
- A qualitative exploration of the facilitators and barriers to early diagnosis and treatment of head and neck cancer: Perceptions of patients and carers.European journal of cancer care · 2022Article
- 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
- The effectiveness of the Guy's Rapid Diagnostic Clinic (RDC) in detecting cancer and serious conditions in vague symptom patients.British journal of cancer · 2021Article
- Effects of Patients' Perceptions of Physician-Patient Relational Empathy on an Inflammation Marker in Patients with Crohn's Disease: The Intermediary Roles of Anxiety, Self-Efficacy, and Sleep Quality.Psychology research and behavior management · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo examine whether the quality of the patient-physician relationship, assessed by the general practitioner (GP) and the patient, associates with GPs' use of gut feeling (GF) in cancer diagnosis.
designCross-sectional questionnaire survey of cancer patients and their GPs.
settingDanish primary care.
participantsNewly diagnosed cancer patients and their GPs. Patients completed a questionnaire and provided the name of the GP to whom they have presented their symptoms. The named GP subsequently received a questionnaire. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: GPs' use of GF in the diagnostic process for the particular patient. GPs who answered that they used their GF 'to a high degree' or 'to a very high degree' were categorised as 'used their GF to a great extent'. GPs who answered that they used their GF 'to some degree', 'to a limited degree' or 'not at all' were categorised as 'limited or no use of GF'.
resultsGPs were less likely to use GF when they assessed relational aspects of the patient encounter as difficult compared with less difficult (OR=0.67; 95% CI 0.46 to 0.97). The physician-reported level of empathy was positively associated with use of GF (OR=2.60; 95% CI 1.60 to 4.22). The lower use of GF in difficult encounters was not modified by level of empathy.
conclusionsExperiencing relational aspects of patient encounter as difficult acted as a barrier for the use of GF in cancer diagnosis. Although physician-rated empathy increased use of GF, high empathy did not dissolve the low use of GF in difficult encounters. As diagnosis of cancer is a key challenge in primary care, it is important that GPs are aware that the sensitivity of cancer-related GF is compromised by a difficult patient-physician relationship.
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.