ArticleZdravstveno varstvo2022
Primary Care System Factors and Clinical Decision-making in Patients that Could Have Lung Cancer: a Vignette Study in Five Balkan Region Countries.
Article in Zdravstveno varstvo, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Late-Stage Presentation and Diagnostic Gaps in Romanian Lung Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Tertiary Center Analysis with Implications for Scalable Screening.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Beyond the Scan: Adapting Multimodal Lung Cancer Screening for Central and Eastern Europe-Overcoming Systemic Barriers and Epidemiological Confounders.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- 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
- The journey of lung cancer patients from symptoms to diagnosis in Greece. A mixed methods approach.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death, with wide variations in national survival rates. This study compares primary care system factors and primary care practitioners' (PCPs') clinical decision-making for a vignette of a patient that could have lung cancer in five Balkan region countries (Slovenia, Croatia, Bulgaria, Greece, Romania).
methodsPCPs participated in an online questionnaire that asked for demographic data, practice characteristics, and information on health system factors. Participants were also asked to make clinical decisions in a vignette of a patient with possible lung cancer.
resultsThe survey was completed by 475 PCPs. There were significant national differences in PCPs' direct access to investigations, particularly to advanced imaging. PCPs from Bulgaria, Greece, and Romania were more likely to organise relevant investigations. The highest specialist referral rates were in Bulgaria and Romania. PCPs in Bulgaria were less likely to have access to clinical guidelines, and PCPs from Slovenia and Croatia were more likely to have access to a cancer fast-track specialist appointment system. The PCPs' country had a significant effect on their likelihood of investigating or referring the patient.
conclusionsThere are large differences between Balkan region countries in PCPs' levels of direct access to investigations. When faced with a vignette of a patient with the possibility of having lung cancer, their investigation and referral rates vary considerably. To reduce diagnostic delay in lung cancer, direct PCP access to advanced imaging, availability of relevant clinical guidelines, and fast-track referral systems are needed.
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.