ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2026
Clinical assessment of recurrent cancer: a Danish cohort study in general practice.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGPs may detect cancer recurrence (CR) between specialised follow-up visits or after completed follow-up. Knowledge of CR detection is needed to inform GP decision making in general practice.
aimTo examine how often GPs suspected cancer in patients presenting with CR, diagnostic actions taken, and how cancer suspicion and diagnostic actions were associated with the time to recurrence diagnosis. DESIGN AND
settingA retrospective cohort study was conducted linking survey data and national register data.
methodPatients diagnosed with recurrence (of one of seven cancer types) between 1 January 2022 and 31 May 2024 were included. Their GPs provided details on the diagnostic process.
resultsThe GP survey response rate was 48% (1265/2611), and 469 patients presented with signs or symptoms of recurrence. The GPs suspected cancer at the first consultation in 226 patients (48%). A referral was made for diagnostic evaluation in 282 (60%) patients, with fast-track cancer pathways being the most frequent (48%) and fastest referral mode. Diagnostic intervals differed across cancer types at the 90th percentile. The longest intervals were seen for melanoma recurrence, which was 47 days longer than colorectal CR. The median diagnostic interval was 60 days shorter when GPs suspected cancer compared with no suspicion of cancer or other serious disease.
conclusionThe GPs suspected cancer in approximately half of the patients and referred three in five presenting with signs or symptoms of recurrence. In approximately one-third, the GP had no suspicion. The length of the diagnostic interval differed considerably between the seven investigated cancer types.
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.