Development of a survey instrument to investigate the primary care factors related to differences in cancer diagnosis between international jurisdictions

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorRose, Peter W
dc.contributor.authorHamilton, Willie
dc.contributor.authorAldersey, Kate
dc.contributor.authorBarisic, Andriana
dc.contributor.authorDawes, Martin
dc.contributor.authorFoot, Catherine
dc.contributor.authorGrunfeld, Eva
dc.contributor.authorHart, Nigel
dc.contributor.authorNeal, Richard D
dc.contributor.authorPirotta, Marie
dc.contributor.authorSisler, Jeffrey
dc.contributor.authorThulesius, Hans
dc.contributor.authorVedsted, Peter
dc.contributor.authorYoung, Jane
dc.contributor.authorRubin, Greg
dc.contributor.authorThe ICBP Module 3 Working Group*
dc.date.accessioned2014-06-27T19:05:16Z
dc.date.available2014-06-27T19:05:16Z
dc.date.issued2014-06-17
dc.date.updated2014-06-27T19:05:20Z
dc.description.abstractAbstract Background Survival rates following a diagnosis of cancer vary between countries. The International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP), a collaboration between six countries with primary care led health services, was set up in 2009 to investigate the causes of these differences. Module 3 of this collaboration hypothesised that an association exists between the readiness of primary care physicians (PCP) to investigate for cancer – the ‘threshold’ risk level at which they investigate or refer to a specialist for consideration of possible cancer – and survival for that cancer (lung, colorectal and ovarian). We describe the development of an international survey instrument to test this hypothesis. Methods The work was led by an academic steering group in England. They agreed that an online survey was the most pragmatic way of identifying differences between the jurisdictions. Research questions were identified through clinical experience and expert knowledge of the relevant literature.A survey comprising a set of direct questions and five clinical scenarios was developed to investigate the hypothesis. The survey content was discussed and refined concurrently and repeatedly with international partners. The survey was validated using an iterative process in England. Following validation the survey was adapted to be relevant to the health systems operating in other jurisdictions and translated into Danish, Norwegian and Swedish, and into Canadian and Australian English. Results This work has produced a survey with face, content and cross cultural validity that will be circulated in all six countries. It could also form a benchmark for similar surveys in countries with similar health care systems. Conclusions The vignettes could also be used as educational resources. This study is likely to impact on healthcare policy and practice in participating countries.
dc.description.versionPeer Reviewed
dc.identifier.citationBMC Family Practice. 2014 Jun 17;15(1):122
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2296-15-122
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1993/23670
dc.language.rfc3066en
dc.rightsopen accessen_US
dc.rights.holderPeter W Rose et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
dc.titleDevelopment of a survey instrument to investigate the primary care factors related to differences in cancer diagnosis between international jurisdictions
dc.typeJournal Article
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Thumbnail Image
Name:
1471-2296-15-122.xml
Size:
53.19 KB
Format:
Extensible Markup Language
Description:
Download
Thumbnail Image
Name:
1471-2296-15-122.pdf
Size:
779.91 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2.17 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed to upon submission
Description:
Download
Collections
University of Manitoba Scholarship
Rady Faculty of Health Sciences Scholarly Works