You are here

  • Home
  • Online First
  • Predictive values of GPs’ suspicion of serious disease are high enough to warrant subsequent investigation

Article Text

Article menu

other Versions

Download PDFPDF
Diagnosis
Cohort study
Predictive values of GPs’ suspicion of serious disease are high enough to warrant subsequent investigation
  1. Knut Holtedahl
  1. Department of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway
  1. Correspondence to: Professor Knut Holtedahl, Department of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, N-9037 Tromsø, Norway; knut.holtedahl{at}uit.no

https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmed-2014-110060

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Commentary on: Hjertholm P, Ingeman ML, Vedsted P, et al. Predictive values of GPs’ suspicion of serious disease: a population-based follow-up study. Br J Gen Pract 2014;64:e346–53.OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text

    Context

    Although general practitioners (GPs) act as gatekeepers to further investigation into patients’ medical issues, much is unknown about what factors cause them to suspect serious disease and to what extent such suspicions correspond with final diagnoses, especially in the case of cancer. The cohort study conducted by Hjertholm et al attempts to answer these questions, while also examining what actions are taken by GPs when serious disease is suspected.

    Methods

    GPs in a region of Denmark were invited to participate in a 1-day registration of data concerning consulting patients, including a final question, “Are you left with the slightest suspicion of cancer or another serious disease?” Of the invited GPs, 404 (46%) …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Competing interests None.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.