ArticleThe Medical journal of Australia2011
Costs and cost-effectiveness of full implementation of a biennial faecal occult blood test screening program for bowel cancer in Australia.
Article in The Medical journal of Australia, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 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
30 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Comparing 3 values clarification methods for colorectal cancer screening decision-making: a randomized trial in the US and Australia.Journal of general internal medicine · 2014Trial
- Protocol paper for an implementation science approach to promoting colorectal cancer screening in Federally Qualified Health Center Clinics: A stepped-wedge, multilevel intervention trial.Contemporary clinical trials · 2026Article
- Equitable colorectal cancer screening implementation framework via a modified Delphi Consensus for Romanian healthcare.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Costs and Projected Effect of a Federally Qualified Health Center-Based Mailed Colorectal Cancer Screening Program in Texas.Preventing chronic disease · 2024Article
- Recent Perspectives on Cardiovascular Toxicity Associated with Colorectal Cancer Drug Therapy.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Implementation strategies in the Exploration and Preparation phases of a colorectal cancer screening intervention in community health centers.Implementation science communications · 2023Article
- FIT for purpose: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial to personalize surveillance colonoscopy for individuals at elevated risk of colorectal cancer.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023Article
- Colonoscopy follow-up for acute diverticulitis: a multi-centre review.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Article
- Are we underutilising computer tomography colonography in Australia?Internal medicine journal · 2022Article
- Long-term benefits for lower socioeconomic groups by improving bowel screening participation in South Australia: A modelling study.PloS one · 2022Article
- The use of modelling studies to inform planning of health services: case study of rapidly increasing endoscopy services in Australia.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- The Implementation and First-Round Results of a Community-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Program in Shanghai, China.The oncologist · 2018Article
- Family history-based colorectal cancer screening in Australia: A modelling study of the costs, benefits, and harms of different participation scenarios.PLoS medicine · 2018Article
- Article
- Optimizing Patient Risk Stratification for Colonoscopy Screening and Surveillance of Colorectal Cancer: The Role for Linked Data.Frontiers in public health · 2017Article
- Is Travel Time to Colonoscopy Associated With Late-Stage Colorectal Cancer Among Medicare Beneficiaries in Iowa?The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2016Article
- Long-Term Prediction of the Demand of Colonoscopies Generated by a Population-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Program.PloS one · 2016Article
- Increasing Disadvantages in Cancer Survival in New Zealand Compared to Australia, between 2000-05 and 2006-10.PloS one · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the costs and cost-effectiveness of full implementation of biennial bowel cancer screening for Australian residents aged 50-74 years. DESIGN AND
settingIdentification of existing economic models from 1993 to 2010 through searches of PubMed and economic analysis databases, and by seeking expert advice; and additional modelling to determine the costs and cost-effectiveness of full implementation of biennial faecal occult blood test screening for the five million adults in Australia aged 50-74 years.
main outcome measuresEstimated number of deaths from bowel cancer prevented, costs, and cost-effectiveness (cost per life-year gained [LYG]) of biennial bowel cancer screening.
resultsWe identified six relevant economic analyses, all of which found colorectal cancer (CRC) screening to be very cost-effective, with costs per LYG under $55,000 per year in 2010 Australian dollars. Based on our additional modelling, we conservatively estimate that full implementation of biennial screening for people aged 50-74 years would have gross costs of $150 million, reduce CRC mortality by 15%-25%, prevent 300-500 deaths from bowel cancer, and save 3600-6000 life-years annually, for an undiscounted cost per LYG of $25,000-$41,667, compared with no screening, and not taking cost savings as a result of treatment into consideration. The additional expenditure required, after accounting for reductions in CRC incidence, savings in CRC treatment costs, and existing ad-hoc colonoscopy use, is likely to be less than $50 million annually.
conclusionsFull implementation of biennial faecal occult blood test screening in Australia can reduce bowel cancer mortality, and is an efficient use of health resources that would require modest additional government investment.
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.