Article Figures & Data
Tables
Characteristics of participants and their practices Interviewees, n Practice clinical system TPP SystmOne 8 EMIS 10 Practice urgent suspected cancer referral ratioa Low (13.57–85.16) 3 Medium (85.17–107.30) 6 High (107.31–265.87) 9 Practice list size Small or medium (<3500–8000) 6 Large (>8000) 12 Practice deprivation rating 1–5 (more deprived) 12 6–10 (less deprived) 6 Local Clinical Research Network region East of England 2 North East and North Cumbria 1 North West Coast 1 Northern Thames 1 South London 1 South West Peninsula 8 Wessex 2 West of England 2 Sex of participant Male 7 Female 11 Age of participant, years 30–40 3 41–50 2 51–60 5 Not known 8 Experience as clinician, years 0–10 4 11–20 2 >20 4 Not known 8 aThis ratio is the number of urgent suspected cancer referrals observed in the registered population divided by the number ‘expected’, based on the practice’s age–sex specific population and the age–sex specific rates for England. The unit is ‘per 100 patients’, thus the ratio for a practice at the numerical medium is 100. 55
Supplementary Data
- Bur_10.3399BJGPO.2024.0243_Supp_v2.pdf -
Supplementary material is not copyedited or typeset, and is published as supplied by the author(s). The author(s) retain(s) responsibility for its accuracy.
In this issue
Clinical decision making and risk appraisal using electronic risk assessment tools for cancer diagnosis: a qualitative study of GP experiences
Jump to section
More in this TOC Section
Related Articles
Cited By...
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
