ArticleBMJ open2020
Primary care practitioners' diagnostic action when the patient may have cancer: an exploratory vignette study in 20 European countries.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Diagnostic pathways for lung cancer patients in Denmark: General practice events, first referral and stage at diagnosis.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2026Article
- Changes in diagnostic evaluation of patients with lung cancer symptoms.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2025Article
- General practitioners' clinical decision-making in patients that could have cancer: a vignette study comparing the Baltic states with four Nordic countries.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2025Article
- Cancer care at the time of the fourth industrial revolution: an insight to healthcare professionals' perspectives on cancer care and artificial intelligence.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2023Article
- How do the UK's guidelines on imaging for suspected lung cancer compare with other countries?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023Article
- Comparison of the Burden Evolution of the Family Caregivers for Patients With Cancer and Nononcological Diseases Who Need Palliative Care: A Prospective Longitudinal Study.Palliative medicine reports · 2023Article
- What factors empower general practitioners for early cancer diagnosis? A 20-country European Delphi Study.Primary health care research & development · 2022Article
- The role of systemic immuno-inflammatory factors in resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a cohort retrospective study.World journal of surgical oncology · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
26 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesCancer survival rates vary widely between European countries, with differences in timeliness of diagnosis thought to be one key reason. There is little evidence on the way in which different healthcare systems influence primary care practitioners' (PCPs) referral decisions in patients who could have cancer.This study aimed to explore PCPs' diagnostic actions (whether or not they perform a key diagnostic test and/or refer to a specialist) in patients with symptoms that could be due to cancer and how they vary across European countries.
designA primary care survey. PCPs were given vignettes describing patients with symptoms that could indicate cancer and asked how they would manage these patients. The likelihood of taking immediate diagnostic action (a diagnostic test and/or referral) in the different participating countries was analysed. Comparisons between the likelihood of taking immediate diagnostic action and physician characteristics were calculated.
settingCentres in 20 European countries with widely varying cancer survival rates.
participantsA total of 2086 PCPs answered the survey question, with a median of 72 PCPs per country.
resultsPCPs' likelihood of immediate diagnostic action at the first consultation varied from 50% to 82% between countries. PCPs who were more experienced were more likely to take immediate diagnostic action than their peers.
conclusionWhen given vignettes of patients with a low but significant possibility of cancer, more than half of PCPs across Europe would take diagnostic action, most often by ordering diagnostic tests. However, there are substantial between-country variations.
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.