Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20828635›Full record

Trial reportContemporary clinical trials2011

A randomized trial of genetic and environmental risk assessment (GERA) for colorectal cancer risk in primary care: trial design and baseline findings.

Ronald E Myers, Sharon L Manne, Benjamin Wilfond, Randa Sifri, Barry Ziring, Thomas A Wolf, James Cocroft, Amy Ueland, Anett Petrich, Heidi Swan and 2 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Contemporary clinical trials, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00478309 (Gene Environment Risk Assessment and CRC Screening), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT00478309 nacompletednot on this map

Gene Environment Risk Assessment and CRC Screening

TypeinterventionalSponsorFox Chase Cancer CenterRan2007Enrolled697ConditionsColorectal Cancer, Healthy, no Evidence of DiseaseArmscounseling intervention, educational intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

12 authors.

Ronald E MyersDivision of Population Science, Department of Medical Oncology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA 19107, USA. ronald.myers@jefferson.edu
Sharon L Manne
Benjamin Wilfond
Randa Sifri
Barry Ziring
Thomas A Wolf
James Cocroft
Amy Ueland
Anett Petrich
Heidi Swan
Melissa DiCarlo
David S Weinberg

Funding

NEURAL CORRELATES OF AGE-RELATED DIFFERENCES IN MEMORYR01AG011230 · NIA · WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY · PI DAUGHERTY, ANA MARIE, RAZ, NAFTALI · 1993 to 2020
$4.8M
Gene-Environmental Risk Assessment and CRC ScreeningR01CA112230 · NCI · FOX CHASE CANCER CENTER · PI WEINBERG, DAVID S · 2006 to 2011
$3.4M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA112230NCI NIH HHS R01 CA11230-01A2NIA NIH HHS R01 AG011230
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis paper describes an ongoing randomized controlled trial designed to assess the impact of genetic and environmental risk assessment (GERA) on colorectal cancer (CRC) screening.

methodsThe trial includes asymptomatic patients who are 50-79years and are not up-to-date with CRC screening guidelines. Patients who responded to a baseline telephone survey are randomized to a GERA or Control group. GERA group participants meet with a nurse, decide whether to have a GERA blood test (a combination of genetic polymorphism and folate), and, if tested, receive GERA feedback. Follow-up telephone surveys are conducted at 1 and 6months. A chart audit is performed at 6months.

resultsOf 2,223 eligible patients, 562 (25%) have enrolled. Patients who enrolled in the study were significantly younger than those who did not (p<0.001). Participants tended to be 50-59years (64%), female (58%), white (52%), married (51%), and have more than a high school education (67%). At baseline, most participants had some knowledge of CRC screening and GERA, viewed CRC screening favorably, and reported that they had decided to do screening. Almost half had worries and concerns about CRC.

conclusionsOne in four eligible primary care patients enrolled in the study. Age was negatively associated with enrollment. Prospective analyses using data for all participants will provide more definitive information on GERA uptake and the impact of GERA feedback.

Indexed as

AgedAge FactorsColorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerEnvironmental ExposureFemaleFolic AcidGenetic CounselingGenetic TestingHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient ParticipationPolymorphism, GeneticPrimary Health CareFolic Acid

Identifiers

PMID20828635
PMCPMC3006063

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.