ThinkCancer! The multi-method development of a complex behaviour change intervention to improve the early diagnosis of cancer in primary care
Surgey, A. W.; Disbeschl, S.; Lewis, R.; Hiscock, J.; Nafees, S.; Law, R.-J.; Roberts, J. L.; Hendry, A.; Hoare, Z.; Goulden, N.; Stanciu, M. A.; Carson-Stevens, A.; Smits, S.; Brain, K. E.; Edwards, R. T.; Williams, N. H.; Neal, R. D.; Wilkinson, C.
Show abstract
BackgroundRelatively poor UK cancer outcomes are blamed upon late diagnosis. Despite most cancer patients presenting to their GP with symptoms, diagnostic delay remains a common theme, with many clinical and non-clinical factors responsible. Early diagnosis is key to improving outcomes and survival. This paper reports the multi-method process to design a complex intervention to improve the timely diagnosis of symptomatic cancer. MethodsA review of reviews, survey, discrete choice experiment, qualitative interviews and focus groups, all informed a realist evidence synthesis. This in turn informed the design of a complex intervention, guided by the Behaviour Change Wheel framework using a multi-step process. ResultsKey themes from the realist evidence synthesis included effective safety netting at practitioner and practice system level, increased vigilance and lowering referral thresholds. Qualitative findings explored the tensions, barriers and facilitators affecting suspected cancer referral. The Think Cancer! intervention is an educational and quality improvement workshop directed at the whole primary care team. Bespoke cancer safety netting plans and appointment of cancer champions are key components. ConclusionsThink Cancer! is a novel primary care early cancer diagnosis intervention, requiring evaluation through a cluster randomised control trial.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- How and why do Quality Circles work for General Practitioners - a realist approach 95%
- Psychological Impact of the Galleri Test (sIG(n)al): Protocol for a longitudinal evaluation of the psychological impact of receiving a cancer signal in the NHS-Galleri Trial 94%
- What is the suitability of clinical vignettes in benchmarking the performance of online symptom checkers? An audit study 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Targeted encouragement of GP consultations for possible cancer symptoms: randomised controlled trial 97%
- Implementation of predictive risk stratification to reduce emergency admissions to hospital: experiences of general practitioners and practice managers 95%
- Impact of COVID-19 on Migrants’ Access to Primary Care: A National Qualitative Study 93%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Knowledge mobilisation of rapid evidence reviews to inform health and social care policy and practice in a public health emergency: appraisal of the Wales COVID-19 Evidence Centre processes and impact, 2021-23 94%
- Wellbeing Impact Study of High-Speed 2 (WISH2): Protocol for a mixed-methods examination of the impact of major transport infrastructure development on mental health and wellbeing 93%
- Feasibility trial of a new digital training package to enhance primary care practitioners' communication of clinical empathy and realistic optimism 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Inequalities in the decline and recovery of pathological cancer diagnoses during the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic: a population-based study 92%
- Diagnostic performance of the faecal immunochemical test for patients with low-risk symptoms of colorectal cancer in primary care: a service evaluation in the South West of England 90%
- Patient attrition in Molecular Tumour Boards: A Review 89%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.