ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2026
Decision support tools for pancreatic cancer detection: external validation in Australian primary care - a retrospective cohort study.
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. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pancreatic protocol CT awareness.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Article
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
backgroundPancreatic cancer is often diagnosed at an advanced stage with poor survival. Risk assessment tools have been developed to aid early diagnosis of pancreatic cancer in primary care settings (QCancer
aimTo estimate and compare the performance of these tools for identifying patients with undiagnosed pancreatic cancer using Australian primary care data. DESIGN AND
settingA cohort study was conducted using linked primary care and cancer registry data from Victoria, Australia.
methodPatients presenting to primary care with signs and/or symptoms included in the tools (recorded in the primary care 'reason for encounter') were included. Diagnostic accuracy statistics for each tool (and their individual signs and symptoms) were compared.
resultsPatients with pancreatic cancer were more likely (
conclusionWhen applied to Australian primary care data, none of the tools were strongly predictive of pancreatic cancer. New diagnostic models incorporating additional data could potentially improve their predictive performance.
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.