Cancer diagnostic tools to aid decision-making in primary care: mixed-methods systematic reviews and cost-effectiveness analysis

Medina-Lara, Antonieta; Grigore, Bogdan; Lewis, Ruth; Peters, Jaime; Price, Sarah; Landa, Paolo; Robinson, Sophie; Neal, Richard; Hamilton, William; Spencer, Anne E

doi:10.3310/hta24660

Graphic version of this page | Change how these pages look

Journals Library

NHS NIHR - National Institute for Health Research

Journals

Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
Email

An error occurred retrieving publication content to display, please try again.

Home >> Journals >> Health Technology Assessment >> Page Not Found

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

Home >> Journals >> Health Technology Assessment >> Volume {{metadata.Volume}} >> Issue {{metadata.Issue}}
Extended Research Article
i

Toolkit

View Award

Cancer diagnostic tools are currently not widely used in the UK and there is limited evidence on their impact on patient outcomes, while survival benefits drive cost-effectiveness but are unknown.

Antonieta Medina-Lara
[Image - ORCID logo], Bogdan Grigore
[Image - ORCID logo], Ruth Lewis
[Image - ORCID logo], Jaime Peters
[Image - ORCID logo], Sarah Price
[Image - ORCID logo], Paolo Landa
[Image - ORCID logo], Sophie Robinson
[Image - ORCID logo], Richard Neal
[Image - ORCID logo], William Hamilton
[Image - ORCID logo] & Anne E Spencer
[Image - ORCID logo].

Detailed Author information
Detailed Author information

Antonieta Medina-Lara ^1,^*, Bogdan Grigore ², Ruth Lewis ³, Jaime Peters ², Sarah Price ⁴, Paolo Landa ¹, Sophie Robinson ⁵, Richard Neal ⁶, William Hamilton ⁴, Anne E Spencer ¹

¹ Health Economics Group, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
² Exeter Test Group, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
³ North Wales Centre for Primary Care Research, Bangor University, Bangor, UK
⁴ Primary Care Diagnostics, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
⁵ Peninsula Technology Assessment Group, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
⁶ Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
^* Corresponding author Email: A.Medina-Lara@exeter.ac.uk

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}

https://doi.org/{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation:{{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al. ' : ''}}. {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

[Image - Crossmark status check]

Report Content

Full Report
Abstract
Plain English Summary
Plain Language Summary
Scientific Summary

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

Responses to this report

No responses have been published.

If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors. Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

Enter response message*
Name (title, first name, last name)*
Occupation / Job title*
Affiliation / Employer*
Email*
Other authors
For example, if you are responding as a team or group. Please ensure you include full names and separate these using commas
Statement of competing interestsWe believe that readers should be aware of any competing interests (conflicts of interest).The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) define competing interests as including: financial relationships with industry (for example through employment, consultancies, stock, ownership, honoraria, and expert testimony), either directly or through immediate family; personal relationships; academic competition; and intellectual passion.
If yes, please provide details below
Enter response title*
Enter CAPTCHA What is ten minus one?*

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions

An error has occurred in processing the XML document