ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2025
Exploring colorectal cancer patients' diagnostic pathways and general practitioners' assessment of the diagnostic processes: a Danish survey study.
Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Healthcare seeking with colorectal cancer symptoms-results from two Danish population-based surveys in 2012 and 2022.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2026Article
- Introducing colon capsule endoscopy as a new diagnostic modality for patients with bowel symptoms in general practice: a feasibility study.BMC primary care · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionColorectal cancer (CRC) is among the most common cancers and the prognosis of CRC is highly dependent on stage at diagnosis. Although many cases are diagnosed swiftly, there is still room for improvement.
aimWe aimed to explore CRC diagnostic pathways, encompassing (1) place of initial contact; (2) associations with symptom presentations, sex, and age with events in the diagnostic process and initial referrals and (3) the general practitioner's (GP's) evaluation of the diagnostic processes.
methodsAll GPs in North-, Central-, and Southern Denmark were invited to fill in questionnaires for their listed patients diagnosed with cancer during the past two years.
resultsAmong 1,032 recorded CRC patients, 65% had their initial contact in general practice, 5% within the out-of hours service, 10% in the hospital, and 20% were diagnosed based on screening. A total of 27% of CRC patients over 40 who initially presented in general practice were treated or referred on suspicion of another disease first, and 9% were reported to have had hesitated in seeking medical attention. Some 37% presented solely non-specific symptoms, increasing the odds of the GP advising watchful waiting (OR 2.48; 95% CI 1.06-5.81), treating or referring on the suspicion of another illness first (OR 2.57; 95% CI 1.76-3.75), wait due to normal findings (OR 2.11; 95% CI 1.16-3.85), or referring to diagnostic imaging (OR 3.07; 95% CI 1.63-5.79). The GPs assessed nearly one fifth of the diagnostic processes as poor.
conclusionMost CRC patients are diagnosed with initial presentation in general practice. Having non-specific symptoms is common and challenges timely diagnosis.
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.