Accuracy of cancer-risk assessment in primary care practice

Mark Cornfeld, Suzanne Miller, Eric Ross, Dona Schneider

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

9 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background. Primary care physicians (PCPs) are expected to play a central role in assessing cancer risk. This study was designed to evaluate how accurately PCPs would triage individuals at increased risk for cancer when presented with clinical vignettes. Methods. Surveys evaluated practice demographics, attitudes, and responses to clinical scenarios. Answers were compared with guidelines and graded for consistency with the risk assessment. Results. PCPs were inaccurate in assessing risk (p < 0.0001) and inconsistent in recommending screening (p < 0.001). Older physicians were more consistent (p < 0.02). No attitudinal bias was identified. Conclusion. Continuing education of PCPs is important for cancer-risk assessment and management.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)193-198
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Cancer Education
Volume16
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 2001

Keywords

  • Education, Medical, Continuing
  • Family Practice/education
  • Female
  • Gynecology/education
  • Humans
  • Internal Medicine/education
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Neoplasms/epidemiology
  • Obstetrics/education
  • Physicians, Family/standards
  • Primary Health Care/standards
  • Risk Assessment/standards
  • Triage

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Accuracy of cancer-risk assessment in primary care practice'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this