Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38975283›Full record

ArticlePreventive medicine reports2024

Advice after urgent suspected cancer referral when cancer is not found in England: Survey of patients' preferences and perceived acceptability.

Ruth E C Evans, Harriet Watson, Jo Waller, Brian D Nicholson, Thomas Round, Carolynn Gildea, Debs Smith, Suzanne E Scott

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Ruth E C EvansWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, UK.
Harriet WatsonGuy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Jo WallerWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, UK.
Brian D NicholsonNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, UK.
Thomas RoundKing's College London, UK.
Carolynn GildeaNational Disease Registration Service, NHS England, UK.
Debs SmithWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, UK.
Suzanne E ScottWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: No standardised approach exists to provide advice after urgent suspected cancer (USC) referral when cancer is not found. This study aimed to assess preferences and acceptability of receiving advice after USC referral related to: 1) managing ongoing symptoms, 2) responding to early symptoms of other cancers, 3) cancer screening, 4) reducing risks of future cancer. Methods: 2,541 patients from two English NHS Trusts were mailed a survey 1-3 months after having no cancer found following urgent suspected gastrointestinal or head and neck cancer referral. Participants were asked about: willingness to receive advice; prospective acceptability; preferences related to mode, timing and who should provide advice; and previous advice receipt. Results: 406 patients responded (16.0%) with 397 in the final analyses. Few participants had previously received advice, yet most were willing to. Willingness varied by type of advice: fewer were willing to receive advice about early symptoms of other cancers (88.9%) than advice related to ongoing symptoms (94.3%). Acceptability was relatively high for all advice types. Reducing the risk of future cancer advice was more acceptable. Acceptability was lower in those from ethnic minority groups, and with lower levels of education. Most participants preferred to receive advice from a doctor; with results or soon after; either face to face or via the telephone. Conclusions: There is a potential unmet need for advice after USC referral when no cancer is found. Equitable intervention design should focus on increasing acceptability for people from ethnic minority groups and those with lower levels of education.

Indexed as

CancerCancer ScreeningEarly DetectionEarly DiagnosisHealth promotionNeoplasmOpportunistic interventionPatient SurveyPublic Health

Identifiers

PMID38975283
PMCPMC11225704

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.