4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Parent’s perspectives of the pathway to diagnosis of childhood cancer: a matter of diagnostic triage

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Early diagnosis is crucial for the treatment of childhood cancer as it in some cases can prevent progression of disease and improve prognoses. However, childhood cancer can be difficult to diagnose and barriers to early diagnosis are multifactorial. New knowledge about factors influencing the pathway to diagnosis contribute to a deeper understanding of the mechanisms that influence this time span. Qualitative research in the field is sparse but can be expected to lead to additional useful insights that could contribute to efforts shorten time to diagnosis. The purpose of this study was to explore parents’ experiences of the pathway to diagnosis in the time between their noticing bodily or behavioural changes and their child’s diagnosis.

          Methods

          The study is a qualitative interview study carried out in large Danish hospital. Thirty-two interviews with a total of 46 parents of children with cancer were included for analysis. The children were diagnosed with haematological cancers ( n = 17), solid tumours ( n = 9) or brain tumours ( n = 6). Data were analysed applying the theoretical model of pathways to treatment and an inductive-deductive approach. A revised ‘diagnostic triage’ model was developed and validated by member checking.

          Results

          The pathway to diagnosis was influenced by various factors which we present as consistent parts of a new diagnostic triage model. Each factor impacts the level of urgency assigned to bodily and behavioural changes by parents, general practitioners and specialists. The model of diagnostic triage was developed and validated to understand mechanisms influencing time from the point parents notice changes in their child to diagnosis. The model identifies dynamic movement between parental triage in everyday life and professional triage in a healthcare system, both affecting appraisal and case escalation according to: 1) the nature of bodily and behavioural changes, 2) parental intuition, 3) social relations, 4) professional-child-parent interaction, and 5) specialist-child-parent interaction.

          Conclusions

          Diagnostic triage is a model which explains mechanisms that shape the pathway to diagnosis. It is a contribution aimed at supporting the clinical diagnostic process, that ultimately could ensure more timely testing, referral and diagnosis, and also a novel theoretical framework for future research on diagnostic pathways.

          Supplementary information

          Supplementary information accompanies this paper at 10.1186/s12913-020-05821-2.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups.

          Qualitative research explores complex phenomena encountered by clinicians, health care providers, policy makers and consumers. Although partial checklists are available, no consolidated reporting framework exists for any type of qualitative design. To develop a checklist for explicit and comprehensive reporting of qualitative studies (in depth interviews and focus groups). We performed a comprehensive search in Cochrane and Campbell Protocols, Medline, CINAHL, systematic reviews of qualitative studies, author or reviewer guidelines of major medical journals and reference lists of relevant publications for existing checklists used to assess qualitative studies. Seventy-six items from 22 checklists were compiled into a comprehensive list. All items were grouped into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. Duplicate items and those that were ambiguous, too broadly defined and impractical to assess were removed. Items most frequently included in the checklists related to sampling method, setting for data collection, method of data collection, respondent validation of findings, method of recording data, description of the derivation of themes and inclusion of supporting quotations. We grouped all items into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. The criteria included in COREQ, a 32-item checklist, can help researchers to report important aspects of the research team, study methods, context of the study, findings, analysis and interpretations.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Standards for reporting qualitative research: a synthesis of recommendations.

            Standards for reporting exist for many types of quantitative research, but currently none exist for the broad spectrum of qualitative research. The purpose of the present study was to formulate and define standards for reporting qualitative research while preserving the requisite flexibility to accommodate various paradigms, approaches, and methods.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Indicators of socioeconomic position (part 1).

              This glossary presents a comprehensive list of indicators of socioeconomic position used in health research. A description of what they intend to measure is given together with how data are elicited and the advantages and limitation of the indicators. The glossary is divided into two parts for journal publication but the intention is that it should be used as one piece. The second part highlights a life course approach and will be published in the next issue of the journal.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                line.hjoellund.pedersen@regionh.dk
                Journal
                BMC Health Serv Res
                BMC Health Serv Res
                BMC Health Services Research
                BioMed Central (London )
                1472-6963
                22 October 2020
                22 October 2020
                2020
                : 20
                : 969
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
                [2 ]GRID grid.5254.6, ISNI 0000 0001 0674 042X, Department of Anthropology, , University of Copenhagen, ; Copenhagen, Denmark
                [3 ]GRID grid.5254.6, ISNI 0000 0001 0674 042X, Institute of Clinical Medicine, , University of Copenhagen, ; Copenhagen, Denmark
                [4 ]GRID grid.417390.8, ISNI 0000 0001 2175 6024, Danish Cancer Society Research Centre, Survivorship and Inequality in Cancer, Danish Cancer Society, ; Copenhagen, Denmark
                [5 ]GRID grid.476266.7, Department of Clinical Oncology & Palliative Care, , Zealand University Hospital, ; Naestved, Denmark
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7305-098X
                Article
                5821
                10.1186/s12913-020-05821-2
                7584100
                33092610
                3a940753-1f44-469f-bd16-b007f210833c
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 21 April 2020
                : 14 October 2020
                Funding
                Funded by: Børnecancerfonden (DK)
                Funded by: Dagmar Marshalls Fond (DK)
                Funded by: Helsefonden (DK)
                Funded by: Else og Mogens Wedell Wedellsborgs Fond (DK)
                Funded by: Tømrermester Jørgen Holm og Hustru Elisa F. Hansens Mindelegat
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100008363, Kræftens Bekæmpelse;
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Health & Social care
                early diagnosis,diagnostic pathway,childhood cancer,parent,primary care,secondary care,triage,qualitative research,theory development,model

                Comments

                Comment on this article