Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31848175›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

How representative are colorectal, lung, breast and prostate cancer patients responding to the National Cancer Patient Experience Survey (CPES) of the cancer registry population in England? A population-based case control study.

Saleh A Alessy, Elizabeth A Davies, Janette Rawlinson, Matthew Baker, Margreet Lüchtenborg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

5 authors.

Saleh A AlessyCancer Epidemiology, Population and Global Health, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King's College London, London, London, UK saleh.alessy@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-4588-7410
Elizabeth A DaviesCancer Epidemiology, Population and Global Health, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King's College London, London, London, UK.
Janette RawlinsonConsumer Forum, NCRI CSG (Lung) Subgroup, BTOG Steering Committee, NHSE CEG, National Cancer Research Institute, London, UK.
Matthew BakerConsumer Involvement Advisory Group, Consumer Forum, National Cancer Research Institute, London, UK.
Margreet LüchtenborgCancer Epidemiology, Population and Global Health, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King's College London, London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the representativeness of National Cancer Patient Experience Survey (CPES) responders compared with the English cancer registry population in term of age, sex, socioeconomic deprivation, ethnicity, disease stage and median survival.

designPopulation-based case-control study.

settingEngland. POPULATION: We identified 103 186 colorectal, lung, breast and prostate cancer patients responding to at least one survey during 2010-2014 and randomly selected one non-responder from the cancer registry matched on cancer type and yearly quarter of diagnosis.

main outcome measureWe compared age, sex, socioeconomic deprivation, ethnicity and disease stage between the two groups using logistic regression. We also compared survival (in years) using the Mann-Whitney test.

resultsAcross all cancer types survey responders were younger, more likely to have a White ethnic background, to be resident in less deprived areas and diagnosed with earlier stage disease although they varied between cancers. Median survival for responders was also higher than for the cancer registry population (colorectal: 4.8 vs 3.2; lung: 2.0 vs 0.3; breast: 5.7 vs 5.4; and prostate: 5.7 vs 5.2 years; all p-values<0.001).

conclusionCPES responders with the four most common cancers do not necessarily represent all patients with these cancers in terms of demographic characteristics and tumour stage at diagnosis. These limitations should be considered when interpreting findings. To capture the experiences of patients currently underrepresented in CPES, different approaches may need to be taken.

Indexed as

RegistriesAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBreast NeoplasmsCase-Control StudiesColorectal NeoplasmsEnglandFemaleHealth SurveysHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedProstatic Neoplasmscancerpatient experiencerepresentativenesssurvey

Identifiers

PMID31848175
PMCPMC6937072

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.