↓ Skip to main content

Abdominal symptoms and cancer in the abdomen: prospective cohort study in European primary care

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Abdominal symptoms and cancer in the abdomen: prospective cohort study in European primary care
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, April 2018
DOI 10.3399/bjgp18x695777
Pubmed ID
Authors

Knut Holtedahl, Peter Hjertholm, Lars Borgquist, Gé A Donker, Frank Buntinx, David Weller, Tonje Braaten, Jörgen Månsson, Eva Lena Strandberg, Christine Campbell, Joke C Korevaar, Ranjan Parajuli

Abstract

Different abdominal symptoms may signal cancer, but their role is unclear. To examine associations between abdominal symptoms and subsequent cancer diagnosed in the abdominal region. Prospective cohort study comprising 493 GPs from surgeries in Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Scotland, Belgium, and the Netherlands. Over a 10-day period, the GPs recorded consecutive consultations and noted: patients who presented with abdominal symptoms pre-specified on the registration form; additional data on non-specific symptoms; and features of the consultation. Eight months later, data on all cancer diagnoses among all study patients in the participating general practices were requested from the GPs. Consultations with 61 802 patients were recorded and abdominal symptoms were documented in 6264 (10.1%) patients. Malignancy, both abdominal and non-abdominal, was subsequently diagnosed in 511 patients (0.8%). Among patients with a new cancer in the abdomen (n = 251), 175 (69.7%) were diagnosed within 180 days after consultation. In a multivariate model, the highest sex- and age-adjusted hazard ratio (HR) was for the single symptom of rectal bleeding (HR 19.1, 95% confidence interval = 8.7 to 41.7). Positive predictive values of >3% were found for macroscopic haematuria, rectal bleeding, and involuntary weight loss, with variations according to age and sex. The three symptoms relating to irregular bleeding had particularly high specificity in terms of colorectal, uterine, and bladder cancer. A patient with undiagnosed cancer may present with symptoms or no symptoms. Irregular bleeding must always be explained. Abdominal pain occurs with all types of abdominal cancer and several symptoms may signal colorectal cancer. The findings are important as they influence how GPs think and act, and how they can contribute to an earlier diagnosis of cancer.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 15%
Student > Master 7 13%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Other 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 22 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Physics and Astronomy 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 27 52%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 August 2021.
All research outputs
#6,449,410
of 23,041,514 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#2,149
of 4,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,907
of 329,292 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#43
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,041,514 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,319 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.1. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,292 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.