ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2007
Colorectal cancer screening coverage in Greece. PACMeR 02.01 study collaboration.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Barriers and Attitudes toward Breast Cancer Screening among Omani Women.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2020Article
- Colocteral cancer management and prevention policies in Greece.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2010Article
- Cancer screening in a middle-aged general population: factors associated with practices and attitudes.BMC public health · 2009Article
- Double-blind control of the data manager doesn't have any impact on data entry reliability and should be considered as an avoidable cost.BMC medical research methodology · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsColorectal cancer is a major cause of cancer death in European countries and differences in screening implementation may in part explain USA vs European survival differences. Despite the evidence, no study has evaluated the population colorectal cancer screening (CCS) coverage in any European country. We aimed to index the current CCS practices among a large sample of Greek healthy adults. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study was designed as a cross-sectional survey. Screening practice habits of 5,259 healthy adults, aged 50-80, were surveyed. Both overall and screening practices of stool occult blood test (SOBT), digital rectal examination (DRE), and colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy (COL/SIG) were analyzed.
resultsOf the population analyzed, 90.1% declared that they were interested in cancer prevention activities. Overall SOBT practice rate within the last 2 years was 4.77%. When only screening procedures were analyzed, this percentage shrank to 1.73%. Overall and screening COL/SIG rates within the last 10 years were 8.76 and 1.74%, respectively. The respective proportions of individuals who underwent DRE were 14.54 and 5.2%. Evidence-based screening practices were influenced by age, family history of colorectal cancer, profession, and educational level; however, SOBT and colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy did not overcome 4.1 and 4.6% in any subpopulation analyzed.
conclusionThe level of CCS coverage among the examined sample of Greek adults was discouraging. Surveys among other European countries are encouraged.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.