ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2019
Quality improvements of safety-netting guidelines for cancer in UK primary care: insights from a qualitative interview study of GPs.
Article 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 14 papers, 4 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Family physician perspectives on managing indirect patient care activities in the electronic inbox: a systematic mixed studies review.Family practice · 2025Pooled it
- The implementation challenge of computerised clinical decision support systems for the detection of disease in primary care: systematic review and recommendations.Implementation science : IS · 2025Pooled it
- Outcomes of guidelines from health technology assessment organizations in community-based primary care: a systematic mixed studies review.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024Pooled it
- Diagnostic uncertainty in primary care: what is known about its communication, and what are the associated ethical issues?Family practice · 2021Pooled it
- Role of communicating diagnostic uncertainty in the safety-netting process: insights from a vignette study.BMJ quality & safety · 2024Article
- 'ThinkCancer!': randomised feasibility trial of a novel practice-based early cancer diagnosis intervention.BJGP open · 2024Article
- How is diagnostic uncertainty communicated and managed in real world primary care settings?BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Hidden systems in primary care cancer detection: an embedded qualitative intervention development study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024Article
- Article
- What are the similarities and differences in lung cancer symptom appraisal and help-seeking according to smoking status? A qualitative study with lung cancer patients.Psycho-oncology · 2022Article
- Primary care practice and cancer suspicion during the first three COVID-19 lockdowns in the UK: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022Article
- Article
- Optimising GPs' communication of advice to facilitate patients' self-care and prompt follow-up when the diagnosis is uncertain: a realist review of 'safety-netting' in primary care.BMJ quality & safety · 2022Review
- Protocol for a feasibility study incorporating a randomised pilot trial with an embedded process evaluation and feasibility economic analysis of ThinkCancer!: a primary care intervention to expedite cancer diagnosis in Wales.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSafety netting is a diagnostic strategy that involves monitoring patients with symptoms possibly indicative of serious illness, such as cancer, until they are resolved. Optimising safety-netting practice in primary care has been proposed to improve quality of care and clinical outcomes. Introducing guidelines is a potential means to achieve this.
aimTo seek the insight of frontline GPs regarding proposed safety-netting guidelines for suspected cancer in UK primary care. DESIGN AND
settingA qualitative interview study with 25 GPs practising in Oxfordshire, UK.
methodTranscripts from semi-structured interviews were analysed thematically by a multidisciplinary research team using a mind-mapping approach.
resultsGPs were supportive of initiatives to optimise safety netting. Guidelines on establishing who has responsibility for follow-up, keeping patient details up to date, and ensuring test result review is conducted by someone with knowledge of cancer guidelines were already being followed. Sharing diagnostic uncertainty and ensuring an up-to-date understanding of guidelines were only partially implemented. Neither informing patients of all (including negative) test results nor ensuring recurrent unexplained symptoms are always flagged and referred were considered feasible. The lack of detail, for example, the expected duration of symptoms, caused some concern. Overall, doubts were expressed about the feasibility of the guidelines given the time, recruitment, and resource challenges faced in UK primary care.
conclusionGPs expressed general support for safety netting, yet were unconvinced that key elements of the guidelines were feasible, especially in the context of pressures on general practice staffing and time.
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.