Referral challenges for early-onset colorectal cancer: a qualitative study in UK primary care
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The incidence of early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC) in adults aged <50 years has increased in several Western nations. National surveys have highlighted significant barriers to accessing timely care for patients with EOCRC, which may be contributing to a late stage of presentation in this population group. AIM: To explore awareness of the increasing incidence of EOCRC, and to understand the potential barriers or facilitators faced by GPs when referring younger adults to secondary care with features indicative of EOCRC. DESIGN & SETTING: Qualitative methodology, via virtual semi-structured interviews with 17 GPs in Northern Ireland. METHOD: Reflective thematic analysis was conducted with reference to Braun and Clarke's framework. RESULTS: Three main themes were identified among participating GPs: awareness, diagnostic, and referral challenges. Awareness challenges focused on perceptions of EOCRC being solely associated with hereditary cancer syndromes, and colorectal cancer being a condition of older adults. Key diagnostic challenges centred around the commonality of lower gastrointestinal complaints and overlap in EOCRC symptoms with benign conditions. Restrictions in age-based referral guidance and a GP 'guilt complex' surrounding over-referral to secondary care summarised the referral challenges. Young females were perceived as being particularly disadvantaged with regard to delays in diagnosis. CONCLUSION: This novel research outlines potential reasons for the diagnostic delays seen in patients with EOCRC from a GP perspective, and highlights many of the complicating factors that contribute to the diagnostic process.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it