Improving cancer outcomes: Better access to diagnostics in primary care could be critical

British Journal of General Practice

Volumn 61, Issue 586, 2011, Pages 317-318

  Rubin, Greg ^a   Vedsted, Peter ^b   Emery, Jon ^c  

^a DURHAM UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b AARHUS UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AWARENESS; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER RISK; CANCER SURVIVAL; CLINICAL FEATURE; COLORECTAL CANCER; DELAYED DIAGNOSIS; DENMARK; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; EDITORIAL; GENERAL PRACTICE; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; NEOPLASM; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; PROGNOSIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); UNITED KINGDOM;

EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; GENERAL PRACTICE; HEALTH SERVICES ACCESSIBILITY; HUMANS; NEOPLASMS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 79957476266     PISSN: 09601643     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3399/bjgp11X572283     Document Type: Editorial

References (14)

1. Department of Health. Improving outcomes: a strategy for cancer. London: Department of Health, 2011.
2. Henley SJ, King JB, Gerrman RR, et al. Surveillance of screening-detected cancers (colon and rectum, breast, and cervix) - United States, 2004-2006. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2010.
3. Royal College of General Practitioners. National Audit of Cancer Diagnosis in Primary Care. http://www.dur.ac.uk/school.health/erdu/cancer-audit/ (accessed 1 Apr 2011).
4. Abdel-Rahman M, Stockton D, Rachet B, et al. What if cancer survival in Britain were the same as in Europe: howmany deaths are avoidable? Br J Cancer2009; 101 Suppl 2: S115-S24.
5. Thomson CS, Forman D. Cancer survival in England and the influence of early diagnosis: what can we learn from recent EUROCARE results? Br J Cancer 2009; 101 Suppl 2: S102-S109.
6. Richards MA. The size of the prize for earlier diagnosis of cancer in England. Br J Cancer 2009; 101(Suppl 2): S125-S129.
7. Andersen BL, Cacioppo JT. Delay in seeking a cancer diagnosis: delay stages and psychophysiological comparison processes. Br J Soc Psychol 1995; 34 (Pt 1): 33-52.
8. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Referral guidelines for suspected cancer. Clinical guidelines CG27. London: NICE, 2005.
9. Foot C, Naylor C, Imison C. The quality of GP diagnosis and referral. London: The Kings Fund, 2010.
10. McCowan C, Donnan PT, Dewar JA, et al. Identifying suspected breast cancer: development and validation of a clinical prediction rule. Br J Gen Pract 2011; DOI: 10.3399/bjgp11X572391.
11. Hamilton W, Astin M, Griffin T, et al. Diagnostic value of symptoms for colorectal cancer in primary care: a systematic review. Br J Gen Pract 2011; DOI: 10.3399/bjgp11X572427.
12. Shapley M, Mansell G, Jordan JL, Jordan KP. Positive predictive values of ≥5% in primary care for cancer: systemic review. Br J Gen Pract 2010; DOI: 10.3399/bjgp10X515412.
13. Whelan J, Fern LA, Campbell C, et al. How frequently do young people with potential cancer symptoms present in primary care? Br J Gen Pract 2011; DOI: 10.3399/bjgp11X572418.
14. Vedsted P, Olesen F. Are the serious problems in cancer survival partly rooted in gatekeeper principles? Br J Gen Pract 2011; in press.