Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39430075›Full record

ArticleEcancermedicalscience2024

Determining factors of presentation and diagnosis delays in patients with colorectal cancer and the impact on stage: a cross sectional study in Yogyakarta, Indonesia.

Norma Dewi Suryani, Juan Adrian Wiranata, Herindita Puspitaningtyas, Susanna Hilda Hutajulu, Yayi Suryo Prabandari, Adeodatus Yuda Handaya, Mardiah Suci Hardianti, Kartika Widayati Taroeno-Hariadi, Johan Kurnianda, Ibnu Purwanto

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecancermedicalscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

10 authors.

Norma Dewi SuryaniClinical Epidemiology Study Program, Master of Clinical Medicine Postgraduate Program, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia.
Juan Adrian WiranataClinical Epidemiology Study Program, Master of Clinical Medicine Postgraduate Program, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia.
Herindita PuspitaningtyasDoctorate Program of Health and Medical Science, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia.
Susanna Hilda HutajuluDivision of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Dr. Sardjito General Hospital, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia.
Yayi Suryo PrabandariDepartment of Health Behaviour, Environment, and Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia.
Adeodatus Yuda HandayaDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia.
Mardiah Suci HardiantiDivision of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Dr. Sardjito General Hospital, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia.
Kartika Widayati Taroeno-HariadiDivision of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Dr. Sardjito General Hospital, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia.
Johan KurniandaDivision of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Dr. Sardjito General Hospital, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia.
Ibnu PurwantoDivision of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Dr. Sardjito General Hospital, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Early colorectal cancer (CRC) symptom recognition and prompt diagnosis are crucial for the identification of cases in the earliest stage and for improving survival. This study investigates the incidence of presentation and diagnosis delays, their contributing determinants and their impact on the cancer stage at diagnosis. Methods: This cross-sectional study recruited 227 CRC patients between November 2022 and October 2023. We developed a semi-structured questionnaire to collect information on the factors related to delays in the presentation and diagnosis. Presentation delay was defined as the time between the initial symptoms and the first consultation exceeding 1 month, while diagnosis delay was defined as the time between presentation and the pathological diagnosis confirmation exceeding 4 months. We examined the impact of these delays on the status of the metastatic disease and identified the determinants of the presentation and diagnosis delays. Results: The median values for presentation and diagnosis delay are 1 and 4 months, respectively. Patients aged ≥60 years were less likely to experience diagnosis delays odds ratio (OR = 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28-0.95, Conclusion: Our CRC patients experience considerable delays in their presentation and diagnosis. Diagnosis delays were observed to increase the likelihood of presenting with metastatic disease. Given the determinants and the patients' perspectives revealed in this study, future research to explore evidence-based approaches to reducing these delays is warranted.

Indexed as

colorectal neoplasmsdelayed diagnosisneoplasm metastasis

Identifiers

PMID39430075
PMCPMC11489102

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.