Trial reportCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2012
Patient activation increases colorectal cancer screening rates: a randomized trial among low-income minority patients.
Trial report in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 5 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
42 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of Interventions Intended to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA internal medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Patient-mediated interventions to improve professional practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Promoting patient participation in healthcare interactions through communication skills training: A systematic review.Patient education and counseling · 2017Pooled it
- Characteristics of Effective Colorectal Cancer Screening Navigation Programs in Federally Qualified Health Centers: A Systematic Review.Journal of health care for the poor and underserved · 2017Pooled it
- Health literacy and cancer screening: a systematic review.Patient education and counseling · 2014Pooled it
- Improving Uptake of Cancer Genetic Risk Assessment in a Remote Tailored Risk Communication and Navigation Intervention: Large Effect Size but Room to Grow.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023Trial
- Preparing Patients with Early Stage Prostate Cancer to Participate in Clinical Appointments Using a Shared Decision Making Training Video.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022Trial
- Computer-tailored intervention increases colorectal cancer screening among low-income African Americans in primary care: Results of a randomized trial.Preventive medicine · 2021Trial
- Trauma-Informed Personalized Scripts to Address Partner Violence and Reproductive Coercion: Follow-Up Findings from an Implementation Randomized Controlled Trial Study.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2021Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- The Effectiveness of a Physician-Only and Physician-Patient Intervention on Colorectal Cancer Screening Discussions Between Providers and African American and Latino Patients.Journal of general internal medicine · 2015Trial
- Implementation intentions and colorectal screening: a randomized trial in safety-net clinics.American journal of preventive medicine · 2014Trial
- An automated intervention with stepped increases in support to increase uptake of colorectal cancer screening: a randomized trial.Annals of internal medicine · 2013Trial
- Aid-assisted decision making and colorectal cancer screening: a randomized controlled trial.American journal of preventive medicine · 2012Trial
- Patient-provider discussions about colorectal cancer screening: who initiates elements of informed decision making?Journal of general internal medicine · 2012Trial
- Trial
- The Effectiveness ofCancers · 2025Article
- Mi-CARE: Comparing Three Evidence-Based Interventions to Promote Colorectal Cancer Screening among Ethnic Minorities within Three Different Clinical Contexts.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Assessing the Functional Accessibility, Actionability, and Quality of Patient Education Materials from Canadian Cancer Agencies.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates remain low among low-income and minority populations. The purpose of this study was to determine whether providing patients with screening information, activating them to ask for a screening test, and telephone barriers counseling improves CRC screening rates compared with providing screening information only.
methodsPatients were randomized to CRC screening information plus patient activation and barriers counseling (n = 138) or CRC screening information (n = 132). Barriers counseling was attempted among activated patients if screening was not completed after one month. CRC screening test completion was determined by medical record review at two months after the medical visit. Logistic regression was used to determine whether activated patients were more likely to complete CRC screening, after adjustment for confounding factors (e.g., demographic characteristics and CRC knowledge).
resultsPatients were African American (72.2%), female (63.7%), had annual household incomes less than $20,000 (60.7%), no health insurance (57.0%), and limited health literacy skills (53.7%). In adjusted analyses, more patients randomized to the activation group completed a screening test (19.6% vs. 9.9%; OR = 2.35, 95% CI: 1.14-5.56; P = 0.020). In addition, more activated patients reported discussing screening with their provider (54.4% vs. 27.5%, OR = 3.29, 95% CI: 1.95-5.56; P < 0.001) and had more screening tests ordered (39.1% vs. 17.6%; OR = 3.40, 95% CI: 1.88-6.15; P < 0.001) compared with those in the control group.
conclusionPatient activation increased CRC screening rates among low-income minority patients. IMPACT: Innovative strategies are still needed to increase CRC screening discussions, motivate providers to recommend screening to patients, as well as assist patients to complete ordered screening tests.
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.