Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Nov 28;69(689):e809-e818.
doi: 10.3399/bjgp19X706745. Print 2019 Dec.

Decision support tools to improve cancer diagnostic decision making in primary care: a systematic review

Affiliations

Decision support tools to improve cancer diagnostic decision making in primary care: a systematic review

Sophie Chima et al. Br J Gen Pract. .

Abstract

Background: The diagnosis of cancer in primary care is complex and challenging. Electronic clinical decision support tools (eCDSTs) have been proposed as an approach to improve GP decision making, but no systematic review has examined their role in cancer diagnosis.

Aim: To investigate whether eCDSTs improve diagnostic decision making for cancer in primary care and to determine which elements influence successful implementation.

Design and setting: A systematic review of relevant studies conducted worldwide and published in English between 1 January 1998 and 31 December 2018.

Method: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched, and a consultation of reference lists and citation tracking was carried out. Exclusion criteria included the absence of eCDSTs used in asymptomatic populations, and studies that did not involve support delivered to the GP. The most relevant Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklists were applied according to study design of the included paper.

Results: Of the nine studies included, three showed improvements in decision making for cancer diagnosis, three demonstrated positive effects on secondary clinical or health service outcomes such as prescribing, quality of referrals, or cost-effectiveness, and one study found a reduction in time to cancer diagnosis. Barriers to implementation included trust, the compatibility of eCDST recommendations with the GP's role as a gatekeeper, and impact on workflow.

Conclusion: eCDSTs have the capacity to improve decision making for a cancer diagnosis, but the optimal mode of delivery remains unclear. Although such tools could assist GPs in the future, further well-designed trials of all eCDSTs are needed to determine their cost-effectiveness and the most appropriate implementation methods.

Keywords: cancer; clinical decision support tool; early diagnosis; general practitioners; primary health care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
PRISMA flow diagram of literature search. eCDST = clinical decision support tool. PRISMA = Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

References

    1. Tørring ML, Frydenberg M, Hansen RP, et al. Time to diagnosis and mortality in colorectal cancer: a cohort study in primary care. Br J Cancer. 2011;104(6):934–940. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Neal RD, Tharmanathan P, France B, et al. Is increased time to diagnosis and treatment in symptomatic cancer associated with poorer outcomes? Systematic review. Br J Cancer. 2015;112(Suppl 1):S92–S107. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hamilton W. Five misconceptions in cancer diagnosis. Br J Gen Pract. 2009. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Emery JD. The challenges of early diagnosis of cancer in general practice. Med J Aust. 2015;203(10):391–393. - PubMed
    1. Allgar VL, Neal RD. Delays in the diagnosis of six cancers: analysis of data from the National Survey of NHS Patients: Cancer. Br J Cancer. 2005;92(11):1959–1970. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources