Interpreting negative test results when assessing cancer risk in general practice

Affiliations

¹ Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds.
² Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.
³ Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge.

Editorial

Stephen H Bradley et al. Br J Gen Pract. 2021.

. 2021 Jun 24;71(708):298-299.

doi: 10.3399/bjgp21X716189. Print 2021 Jul.

¹ Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds.
² Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.
³ Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge.

No abstract available

Comment in

Interpreting negative tests when assessing cancer risk.
Randev PK. Randev PK. Br J Gen Pract. 2021 Aug 26;71(710):398. doi: 10.3399/bjgp21X716873. Print 2021 Sep. Br J Gen Pract. 2021. PMID: 34446423 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

1. Funston G, Hamilton W, Abel G, et al. The diagnostic performance of CA125 for the detection of ovarian and non-ovarian cancer in primary care: a population-based cohort study. PLoS Med. 2020;17(10):e1003295. - PMC - PubMed
1. Nicholson BD, James T, Paddon M, et al. Faecal immunochemical testing for adults with symptoms of colorectal cancer attending English primary care: a retrospective cohort study of 14 487 consecutive test requests. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2020;52(6):1031–1041. - PubMed
1. Bradley SH, Hatton NLF, Aslam R, et al. Estimating lung cancer risk from chest X-ray and symptoms: a prospective cohort study. Br J Gen Pract. 2021. DOI: . - DOI - PMC - PubMed
1. Cancer Research UK (CRUK) Lung cancer incidence statistics. London: CRUK; 2020.
1. NHS Digital GPs per 1,000 patients. https://www.nhs.uk/Scorecard/Pages/IndicatorFacts.aspx?MetricId=100063 (accessed 8 Jun 2021).