MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406531905 · doi:10.3399/bjgp.2024.0208

Symptom appraisal and help- seeking before a cancer diagnosis during pregnancy: a qualitative study

2025· article· en· W4406531905 on OpenAlex
Afrodita Marcu, Emma Ream, Jo Armes, Faith Gibson, L. Whitaker, Jenny Harris

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of General Practice · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Risks and Factors
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Cancer Research
FundersFaculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Western AustraliaDepartment of Health and Social CareUniversity of SurreyNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicinePregnancyQualitative researchCancerFamily medicineGynecologyObstetricsData scienceComputer scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The estimated incidence of a cancer diagnosis during or shortly after pregnancy is 1 in 1000 pregnancies in England. Pregnancy can have an impact on symptom appraisal and help-seeking for symptoms subsequently diagnosed as cancer. Little is known about the pathway to cancer diagnosis in pregnancy or delays that women can encounter. AIM: To explore symptom appraisal, help-seeking decisions, and experience of receiving a cancer diagnosis during pregnancy. DESIGN AND SETTING: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with women diagnosed with cancer during or shortly after pregnancy in the previous 4 years in the UK, recruited between January and May 2022 via the charity Mummy's Star. METHOD: This study used reflexive thematic analysis of 20 interviews. Analysis was largely inductive and the themes generated were mapped onto the intervals of the Model of Pathways to Treatment. RESULTS: Symptoms were often interpreted through the lens of pregnancy by both participants and most of the healthcare professionals from whom they sought help. Participants who found breast lumps were likely to suspect cancer and be referred promptly for tests in secondary care. Although most participants sought timely help for their symptoms, some subsequently encountered health system delays, partly owing to both the vague nature of their symptoms and the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: Health services need to better support women presenting with possible cancer symptoms during pregnancy to ensure timely diagnosis. Recommendations include prioritising symptoms over attributing them solely to pregnancy, ensuring timely referrals to rule out serious conditions, and emphasising clear communication alongside robust safety-netting practices. A full assessment is essential before dismissing symptoms as pregnancy related.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.425
Threshold uncertainty score0.673

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.380 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it