ArticleCJEM2026
Presentation and management of patients with suspected cancer in the emergency department.
Article in CJEM, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe emergency department (ED) is an understudied route to cancer diagnosis. It is unclear how patients present to the ED at the time of suspected cancer diagnosis, and how physicians manage them. The objective of this study was to describe patient presentations and physician management for patients with a new suspected cancer in the ED.
methodsThis was a prospective study at a tertiary care ED over a 1 year period (Mar 2024-2025). Emergency physicians completed data collection form patients seen in the ED with suspected cancer. Charts were reviewed daily to identify missed patients and pertinent data were extracted. We described types of suspected cancers seen, patient presentation, disposition, and physician acceptability of the follow-up process for cancer workup.
resultsOver the 1 year, 164 patients with suspected cancer diagnoses were seen in the ED, with the top suspected malignancies being gynecological (22.0%), head and neck (11.6%), breast (10.4%), and colorectal (6.7%).The majority of patients (90.2%) presented with symptoms suggestive of malignancy, and 46.3% came to the ED to expedite workup of an already suspected cancer. Approximately, half (52.4%) received a specialist consult in the ED, with 64.0% of those patients subsequently admitted. Among patients who received a consult in the ED, 62.8% were referred not because they were acutely unwell, but to expedite diagnostic workup or due to uncertainty about arranging appropriate follow-up. Physician acceptability of follow-up varied by cancer type.
conclusionPatients with suspected cancer diagnoses are commonly seen in the ED. Many patients receive specialist consultations primarily to expedite diagnostic workup, which may not represent the most efficient use of already strained ED resources. Improved access to reliable and acceptable follow-up from the ED for further workup of patients with suspected cancer, regardless of cancer type, is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41781641What 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.