Trial reportJournal of general internal medicine2012
Patient-provider discussions about colorectal cancer screening: who initiates elements of informed decision making?
Trial report in Journal of general internal medicine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03843957 (Effectiveness and Implementation of mPATH-CRC), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 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.
Effectiveness and Implementation of mPATH-CRC: a Mobile Health System for Colorectal Cancer Screening
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physician Intervention and Chinese Americans' Colorectal Cancer Screening.American journal of health behavior · 2018Trial
- Comparative effectiveness of audit-feedback versus additional physician communication training to improve cancer screening for patients with limited health literacy.Journal of general internal medicine · 2014Trial
- Trial
- Colorectal Cancer Screening Communication and Completion Among Black and Hispanic Primary Care Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Colorectal Cancer Screening Communication and Completion Among Black and Hispanic Primary Care Patients.Research square · 2026Article
- Effectiveness and implementation of mPATH™-CRC: a mobile health system for colorectal cancer screening.Trials · 2023Article
- Impact of a literacy-sensitive intervention on CRC screening knowledge, attitudes, and intention to screen.The Journal of community and supportive oncology · 2016Article
- Risk assessment and clinical decision making for colorectal cancer screening.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2015Article
- The role of health literacy and communication habits on previous colorectal cancer screening among low-income and uninsured patients.Preventive medicine reports · 2015Article
- Shared decision-making about colorectal cancer screening: a conceptual framework to guide research.Patient education and counseling · 2013Article
- Cost-containment redux: time for physicians to engage.Journal of general internal medicine · 2012Article
- Physician communication regarding prostate cancer screening: analysis of unannounced standardized patient visits.Annals of family medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates remain low among low-income minority populations.
objectiveTo evaluate informed decision making (IDM) elements about CRC screening among low-income minority patients.
designObservational data were collected as part of a patient-level randomized controlled trial to improve CRC screening rates. Medical visits (November 2007 to May 2010) were audio-taped and coded for IDM elements about CRC screening. Near the end of the study one provider refused recording of patients' visits (33 of 270 patients). Among all patients in the trial, agreement to be audio taped was 43.5 % (103/237). Evaluable patient (n = 100) visits were assessed for CRC screening discussion occurrence, IDM elements, and who initiated discussion of each IDM element.
participantsPatients were African American (72.2 %), female (63.7 %), with annual household incomes <$20,000 (60.7 %), without health insurance (57.0 %), and limited health literacy (53.7 %). KEY
resultsAlthough CRC screening was mentioned during 48 (48 %) visits, no further discussion about screening occurred in 23 visits (19 times mentioned by the participant with no response from providers). During any visit, the maximum number of IDM elements was five; however, only two visits included five elements. The most common IDM element discussed in addition to the nature of the decision was the assessment of the patient's understanding in 16 (33.3 %) of the visits that included a CRC discussion.
conclusionsA patient activation intervention initiated CRC screening discussions with health care providers; however, limited IDM occurred about CRC screening during medical visits of minority and low-income patients.
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.