Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31485229›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer epidemiology2019

Impact of Primary Care Delay on Progression of Breast Cancer in a Black African Population: A Multicentered Survey.

Olayide Agodirin, Samuel Olatoke, Ganiyu Rahman, Julius Olaogun, Oladapo Kolawole, John Agboola, Olalekan Olasehinde, Aba Katung, Omobolaji Ayandipo, Amarachukwu Etonyeaku and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer epidemiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
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

13 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Olayide AgodirinDepartment of Surgery, University of Ilorin and University of Ilorin Teaching Hospital, Nigeria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7102-864X
Samuel OlatokeDepartment of Surgery, University of Ilorin and University of Ilorin Teaching Hospital, Nigeria.
Ganiyu RahmanDepartment of Surgery, Cape Coast Teaching Hospital, Cape Coast, Ghana.
Julius OlaogunDepartment of Surgery, Ekiti State University Teaching Hospital, Ado-Ekiti, Nigeria.
Oladapo KolawoleDepartment of Surgery, LAUTECH Teaching Hospital, Osogbo, Nigeria.
John AgboolaDepartment of Surgery, University of Ilorin and University of Ilorin Teaching Hospital, Nigeria.
Olalekan OlasehindeDepartment of Surgery, Obafemi Awolowo Teaching Hospital, Ile-Ife, Nigeria.
Aba KatungDepartment of Surgery, Federal Medical Center, Owo, Nigeria.
Omobolaji AyandipoDepartment of Surgery, University College Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Amarachukwu EtonyeakuDepartment of Surgery, Obafemi Awolowo Teaching Hospital, Ilesha, Nigeria.
Anthony AjiboyeDepartment of Surgery, Bowen University Teaching Hospital, Nigeria.
Soliu OguntolaDepartment of Surgery, LAUTECH Teaching Hospital, Ogbomoso, Nigeria.
Oluwafemi FatudimuDepartment of Surgery, Federal Teaching Hospital, Ido-Ekiti, Nigeria.
University of Ilorin Teaching Hospital · NGEkiti State University · NGLadoke Akintola University of Technology Teaching Hospital · NGBowen University Teaching Hospital · NGObafemi Awolowo University · NGUniversity College Hospital, Ibadan · NGUniversity of Cape Coast · GH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundReports are scanty on the impact of long primary care interval in breast cancer. Exploratory reports in Nigeria and other low-middle-income countries suggest detrimental impact. The primary aim was to describe the impact of long primary care interval on breast cancer progression, and the secondary aim was to describe the factors perceived by patients as the reason(s) for long intervals.

methodQuestionnaire-based survey was used in 9 Nigerian tertiary institutions between May 2017 and July 2018. The study hypothesis was that the majority of patients stayed >30 days, and the majority experienced stage migration in primary care interval. Assessment of the impact of the length of interval on tumor stage was done by survival analysis technique, and clustering analysis was used to find subgroups of the patient journey.

resultsA total of 237 patients presented to primary care personnel with tumor ≤5cm (mean 3.4±1.2cm). A total of 151 (69.3%, 95% CI 62.0-75.0) stayed >30 days in primary care interval. Risk of stage migration in primary care interval was 49.3% (95% CI 42.5%-56.3%). The most common reasons for long intervals were symptom misinformation and misdiagnosis. Clustering analysis showed 4 clusters of patients' experience and journey: long interval due to distance, long interval due to misinformation, long interval due to deliberate delaying, and not short interval-prepared for treatment.

conclusionThe majority of patients stayed longer than 30 days in primary care interval. Long primary care interval was associated with a higher risk of stage migration, and more patients reported misinformation and misdiagnosis as reasons for a long interval.

Identifiers

PMID31485229
PMCPMC6702851
OpenAlexW2965124657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.