Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20535541›Full record

ArticleCancer causes & control : CCC2010

Evaluating the impact of an educational intervention to increase CRC screening rates in the African American community: a preliminary study.

Errol J Philip, Katherine DuHamel, Lina Jandorf

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. The relationship between cancer fatalism and education.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Cancer Fatalism, Literacy, and Cancer Information Seeking in the American Public.Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education · 2016
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Colorectal cancer screening brochure for Latinos: focus group evaluation.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2013
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Errol J PhilipUniversity of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, USA. ephilip@nd.edu
Katherine DuHamel
Lina Jandorf
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai · USMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USUniversity of Notre Dame · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Cultural Sensitivity in CRC Screening with AA'sR01CA104130 · NCI · MOUNT SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE OF NYU · PI DUHAMEL, KATHERINE N · 2004 to 2007
$2.3M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS R01 CA104130NCI NIH HHS R01 CA104130-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the acknowledged importance of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and its proven prognostic benefit, African American men and women simultaneously possess the highest rates of CRC-related incidence and mortality (Swan et al. in Cancer 97(6):1528-1540, 2003) and lowest screening rates in the United States (Polite et al. in Med Clin N Am 89(4):771-793, 2005). Effective, targeted interventions that promote CRC screening for this community are therefore critical. The current study evaluated the impact of a print-based educational intervention on screening behavior and associated patient-based factors, including cancer-related knowledge, fatalism, worry, and decisional balance (pros-cons).

methodsOne hundred and eighteen individuals (mean age = 56.08, SD = 5.58) who had not undergone screening were recruited from two health clinics in New York City. Each participant received educational print materials regarding the need for screening, the process of undergoing screening, and the benefits of regular CRC screening.

resultsOne in four individuals had undergone post-intervention screening at a three-month follow-up. Whereas all participants reported a decrease in cancer-related worry (p < .05), it was a decrease in fatalism (p < .05) and an increase in decisional balance (p < .05) that was associated with post-intervention screening behavior. DISCUSSION: These preliminary results suggest that fatalistic beliefs and an individual's assessment of the benefits and barriers of screening may be critical in the decision to undergo CRC screening. Future interventions to increase CRC-screening rates for this community may be improved by focusing on these patient-based factors.

Indexed as

Black or African AmericanHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeColorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleGuidelines as TopicHealth EducationHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedNew York CitySurveys and QuestionnairesTeaching Materials

Identifiers

PMID20535541
PMCPMC3621716
OpenAlexW2052177405

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.