ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2021
Knowledge of and support for cancer patient pathways among general practitioners and other physicians - a study from Sweden.
Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Knowledge and Clinical Practices of Primary Care Physicians Regarding Soft Tissue Sarcomas: A Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the expertise in and support of the implemented new method of cancer patient pathways (CPPs) among general practitioners (GPs) and other working physicians in Sweden.
designA survey in the form of 10 knowledge-based multiple-choice questions (MCQs) and two general questions about CPPs.
settingPhysicians from two different regions in Sweden answered the survey between December 2018 and January 2019. SUBJECTS: GPs in primary care compared to other physicians. 155 participants completed the survey and the response rate was 65%.
main outcome measuresPhysicians' self-estimated knowledge of CPPs in general and opinion of CPPs effect on mortality and morbidity. Their scores on 10 different MCQs. Scores were analysed in subgroups related to the physicians medical specialty and experience.
resultsA majority of all physicians (63%) felt that they had insufficient knowledge regarding the procedure of CPPs, and the average score from the MCQs was 3.8 out of 10 correct answers. The results showed that GPs performed significantly better than specialists from other disciplines.
conclusionsThe low percentage of correctly answered MCQs shows that the information about the entry part of CPPs needs to be improved. The study demonstrates a support for the system with CPPs because the physicians believed in its' positive effects on morbidity and mortality, however, it also reveals a lack of self-estimated knowledge about the system with CPPs.Key pointsCancer patient pathways (CPPs) is a newly implemented method in Sweden that aims to equalize cancer care and reduce the time to diagnosis and treatment.The proficiency of when to initiate an investigation according to a specific CPP seems low. General practitioners (GPs) performed significantly better on knowledge-based questions than other specialists did.Physicians rated their knowledge as insufficient regarding the procedure of CPPs.A clear majority of physicians believed that CPPs promotes a lower mortality and morbidity in cancer.
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.