ArticleArchives of disease in childhood2023
Public awareness of childhood, teenager and young adult cancer signs and symptoms in Great Britain: a cross-sectional survey.
Article in Archives of disease in childhood, 2023. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Polish Society's Perspective on the Challenges Related to Childhood Cancer: Analysis of Public Opinion Research in Poland.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Quantifying diagnostic intervals and routes to diagnosis for children and young people with cancer in the UK (Childhood Cancer Diagnosis study, CCD): a population-based observational study.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2025Article
- Burden landscape of hepatobiliary and pancreatic cancers in Chinese young adults: 30 years' overview and forecasted trends.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- Childhood bone tumours in primary care: helping GPs to identify 'the needle in the haystack'.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess public awareness of the risks and symptoms of cancer in children, teenagers, and young adults (CTYA) aged <18 years in Great Britain.
methodsA face-to-face computer-assisted opinion survey was conducted by Ipsos MORI. Participants were a population-based sample of 1000 adults (475 men, 525 women) aged >18 years, with 26% having children aged 6-15 in their households. Questions covered perception about cumulative cancer risk, confidence in recognising signs and symptoms, recognition and perceived urgency of classical signs and symptoms.
resultsOnly 32% of respondents felt confident in recognising CTYA cancer signs and symptoms. Symptoms deemed to require medical assessment within 48 hours by over 50% of participants included seizures/fits, blood in urine or stool, and persistent vomiting. All symptoms except one were selected for assessment within 3 months. On average, respondents identified 10.6 out of 42 classical signs and symptoms. The most recognised symptoms included lump, swelling in pelvis, testicle or breast (46%), blood in urine or stool (44%), changes to moles (43%), lump/swelling in the chest wall or armpits (41%) and weight loss (40%). The least recognised symptoms were early/late puberty (10%), developmental delay in children aged <2 years (11%) and slow growth (13%), with 8%, 2% and 6%, respectively, perceiving no need to discuss them with a doctor.
conclusionsPublic awareness of childhood cancer risks and symptoms is substantially lower compared with adult cancer awareness in Great Britain. These findings indicate knowledge and awareness gaps among the general public, highlighting the need for a child cancer awareness campaign.
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.