ReviewBMC public health2010
Australia's national bowel cancer screening program: does it work for indigenous Australians?
Review in BMC public health, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.
- Geographical Disparities in Faecal Immunochemical Test-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Participation and Positivity Rates: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026Pooled it
- Cancer Screening Services: What Do Indigenous Communities Want? A Systematic Review.JCO global oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Healthcare providers' perspectives on implementing a primary care-based initiative to increase equitable bowel cancer screening participation in Australia.Health promotion international · 2026Article
- Co-Designing Culturally Tailored Bowel, Cervical and Breast Cancer Screening Interventions With Migrant Communities: Towards Closing the Migration-Related Cancer-Equity Gap in New South Wales, Australia.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- A Review of Western Australian Researchers' Contributions to Understanding Cancer Prevention and Outcomes in Aboriginal People.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Review
- University Departments of Rural Health and cancer research in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2025Article
- Participation in the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program by people with severe mental illness, Australia, 2006-2019: a national data linkage study.The Medical journal of Australia · 2024Article
- Colorectal cancer screening participation in First Nations populations worldwide: a systematic review and data synthesis.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
- "A Huge Gap": Health Care Provider Perspectives on Cancer Screening for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People in the Northern Territory.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Spatial variability in socio-demographic factors affecting participation in the Australian national bowel cancer screening program.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- The 'hot zone policy' for colorectal cancer screening presents unique risks and opportunities for rural Australia.The Australian journal of rural health · 2023Article
- Mapping the knowledge structure and trends in Australian Indigenous health and wellbeing research from 2003 to 2022: a scientometric analysis.Frontiers in sociology · 2023Article
- Lung Cancer Screening: Implementation Challenges and Health Equity Considerations For the Western Pacific Region.JCO global oncology · 2023Review
- Improving Access to Cancer Treatment Services in Australia's Northern Territory-History and Progress.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
- Article
- Impact of colorectal cancer screening participation in remote northern Canada: A retrospective cohort study.World journal of gastroenterology · 2020Article
- Assessment of technical parameters and skills training to inform a simulation-based training program for semi-automated robotic colonoscopy.Endoscopy international open · 2019Article
- Does one workshop on respecting cultural differences increase health professionals' confidence to improve the care of Australian Aboriginal patients with cancer? An evaluation.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- Article
- Improving Access to, Use of, and Outcomes from Public Health Programs: The Importance of Building and Maintaining Trust with Patients/Clients.Frontiers in public health · 2017Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite a lower incidence of bowel cancer overall, Indigenous Australians are more likely to be diagnosed at an advanced stage when prognosis is poor. Bowel cancer screening is an effective means of reducing incidence and mortality from bowel cancer through early identification and prompt treatment. In 2006, Australia began rolling out a population-based National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) using the Faecal Occult Blood Test. Initial evaluation of the program revealed substantial disparities in bowel cancer screening uptake with Indigenous Australians significantly less likely to participate in screening than the non-Indigenous population.This paper critically reviews characteristics of the program which may contribute to the discrepancy in screening uptake, and includes an analysis of organisational, structural, and socio-cultural barriers that play a part in the poorer participation of Indigenous and other disadvantaged and minority groups.
methodsA search was undertaken of peer-reviewed journal articles, government reports, and other grey literature using electronic databases and citation snowballing. Articles were critically evaluated for relevance to themes that addressed the research questions.
resultsThe NBCSP is not reaching many Indigenous Australians in the target group, with factors contributing to sub-optimal participation including how participants are selected, the way the screening kit is distributed, the nature of the test and comprehensiveness of its contents, cultural perceptions of cancer and prevailing low levels of knowledge and awareness of bowel cancer and the importance of screening.
conclusionsOur findings suggest that the population-based approach to implementing bowel cancer screening to the Australian population unintentionally excludes vulnerable minorities, particularly Indigenous and other culturally and linguistically diverse groups. This potentially contributes to exacerbating the already widening disparities in cancer outcomes that exist among Indigenous Australians. Modifications to the program are recommended to facilitate access and participation by Indigenous and other minority populations. Further research is also needed to understand the needs and social and cultural sensitivities of these groups around cancer screening and inform alternative approaches to bowel cancer screening.
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.