ArticlePublic health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)
Colorectal cancer screening among users of county health centers and users of private physician practices.
Article in Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identifying quality improvement targets to facilitate colorectal cancer screening completion.Preventive medicine reports · 2018Article
- Physician counseling on colorectal cancer screening and receipt of screening among Latino patients.Journal of general internal medicine · 2015Article
- System Strategies for Colorectal Cancer Screening at Federally Qualified Health Centers.American journal of public health · 2015Article
- Perceptions of risk factors for colorectal cancer and colorectal cancer risk-related behaviors among current, ex-, and nonsmokers.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2013Article
- Body mass index and screening for colorectal cancer: gender and attitudinal factors.Cancer epidemiology · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe examined use of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening exam modalities among county health centers and private physician offices, where both were located in the same geographic area.
methodsWe surveyed 500 county health center registrants and 570 private physician patients, aged 52-75 years. We administered telephone surveys during 2004 to examine relationships among sociodemographic characteristics; perceived barriers to screening with fecal occult blood test (FOBT), sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy; and self-reported receipt of each exam.
resultsFOBT was more frequent among county health center registrants; sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy were more frequent among private physician patients (p < 0.001). County health center registrants less frequently cited no physician recommendation as a barrier to FOBT, but more frequently cited no recommendation as a barrier to sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy, compared with private physician patients (p < or = 0.02). Among county health center registrants, better health insurance coverage was associated with lower odds of FOBT and higher odds of screening endoscopy; perceived barriers were associated with lower odds of screening (p < 0.02). Among private physician patients, we noted an association between perceived barriers to screening and lower odds of any screening (p < 0.001).
conclusionsOverall, CRC screening among county health center and private physician patient samples compared favorably with overall New York and U.S. rates. Although prior studies using national data suggested that screening rates were equivalent in county health center and private physician primary care settings, we found exam-specific differences in patient-reported screening endoscopy among our two patient samples. Understanding factors that contribute to differences in CRC screening between primary care settings is important for ensuring equal access to CRC screening options for all patients.
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.