Should I take aspirin? A qualitative study on the implementation of a decision aid on taking aspirin for bowel cancer prevention.

Objectives: Australian guidelines recommend 50-70 years consider taking aspirin to reduce their bowel cancer risk. We trialled a decision aid in general practice to facilitate the implementation of these guidelines into clinical practice. This publication reports on the qualitative results from the process evaluation of the trial.

Failure to follow up abnormal test results associated with cervical cancer in primary and ambulatory care: a systematic review.

Background: Cervical cancer is a preventable and treatable form of cancer yet continues to be the fourth most common cancer among women globally. Primary care is the first point of contact most patients have with health services and is where most cancer prevention and early detection occur. Inadequate follow-up of abnormal test results for cervical abnormalities in primary care can lead to suboptimal patient outcomes including higher mortality and decreased quality of life.

Designing a decision aid for cancer prevention: a qualitative study.

Objectives: Australian guidelines recommend people aged 50-70 years old consider taking low-dose aspirin to reduce their risk of colorectal cancer. The aim was to design sex-specific decision aids (DAs) with clinician and consumer input, including expected frequency trees (EFTs) to communicate the risks and benefits of taking aspirin.

Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinicians.

The Colorectal cancer RISk Prediction (CRISP) trial: a randomised controlled trial of a decision support tool for risk-stratified colorectal cancer screening.

Background: A risk-stratified approach to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening could result in a more acceptable balance of benefits and harms, and be more cost-effective.

Aim: To determine the effect of a consultation in general practice using a computerised risk assessment and decision support tool (Colorectal cancer RISk Prediction, CRISP) on risk-appropriate CRC screening.

Design And Setting: Randomised controlled trial in 10 general practices in Melbourne, Australia, from May 2017 to May 2018.

General practice-based cancer research publications: a bibliometric analysis 2013-2019.

Background: General practice plays a critical role in the prevention, diagnosis, management, and survivorship care of patients with cancer. Mapping research outputs over time provides valuable insights into the evolving role of general practice in cancer care.

Aim: To describe and compare the distribution of cancer in general practice research publications by country, cancer type, area of the cancer continuum, author sex, and journal impact factor.

The nature and impact of patient and public involvement in cancer prevention, screening and early detection research: A systematic review.

Patient and public involvement can produce high-quality, relevant research that better addresses the needs of patients and their families. This systematic review investigated the nature and impact of patient and public involvement in cancer prevention, screening and early detection research. Two patient representatives were involved as members of the review team.

The SYMPTOM-upper gastrointestinal study: A mixed methods study exploring symptom appraisal and help-seeking in Australian upper gastrointestinal cancer patients.

Objective: There is limited evidence on the development of pancreatic and oesophagogastric cancer, how patients decide to seek help and the factors impacting help-seeking. Our study, the first in Australia, aimed to explore symptom appraisal and diagnostic pathways in these patients. A secondary aim was to examine the potential to recruit cancer patients through a cancer quality registry.

Time to diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer: A systematic overview of risk factors, interventions and impact on patient outcomes.

Over half of patients with lung cancer are diagnosed at a stage when curative treatment is not possible, suggesting an earlier diagnosis could improve outcomes. This comprehensive overview summarises the evidence on 1) times to diagnosis and treatment, 2) their impact on patient outcomes, 3) risk factors and 4) interventions to reduce time intervals, and 5) key methodological issues in such studies. Eligible articles were relevant systematic or scoping reviews and meta-analyses, searched via PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library; published from database inception to 6 August 2020 (PROSPERO identifier: CRD42020203530).

Commentary: Pivoting during a pandemic: developing a new recruitment model for a randomised controlled trial in response to COVID-19.

Background: Many non-COVID-19 trials were disrupted in 2020 and either struggled to recruit participants or stopped recruiting altogether. In December 2019, just before the pandemic, we were awarded a grant to conduct a randomised controlled trial, the Should I Take Aspirin? (SITA) trial, in Victoria, the Australian state most heavily affected by COVID-19 during 2020.

Main Body: We originally modelled the SITA trial recruitment method on previous trials where participants were approached and recruited in general practice waiting rooms.

An RCT of a decision aid to support informed choices about taking aspirin to prevent colorectal cancer and other chronic diseases: a study protocol for the SITA (Should I Take Aspirin?) trial.

Background: Australian guidelines recommend that all people aged 50-70 years old actively consider taking daily low-dose aspirin (100-300 mg per day) for 2.5 to 5 years to reduce their risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). Despite the change of national CRC prevention guidelines, there has been no active implementation of the guidelines into clinical practice.

Clinicians' opinions on recommending aspirin to prevent colorectal cancer to Australians aged 50-70 years: a qualitative study.

Objectives: Australian guidelines recommend all adults aged 50-70 years old without existing contraindications consider taking low-dose aspirin (100-300 mg per day) for at least 2.5 years to reduce their risk of developing colorectal cancer. We aimed to explore clinicians' practices, knowledge, opinions, and barriers and facilitators to the implementation of these new guidelines.