ArticleDer Radiologe2012
[Screening for colorectal cancer. Current evidence and novel developments].
Article in Der Radiologe, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
clinical issueColorectal cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related morbidity and mortality. Screening has been demonstrated to reduce both the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer. In addition to the large group with a normal risk level, two further risk groups need to be distinguished: increased family risk and hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes. STANDARD METHODS FOR SCREENING: The highest evidence for all screening tests has been demonstrated for guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing. Colonoscopy is a diagnostic and therapeutic tool and it serves as the reference standard for other tests in clinical studies. INNOVATIONS: Fecal immunochemical tests have a higher sensitivity than guaiac-based tests. Several novel techniques are under development and could be adopted by screening programs in the future. Next to colonoscopy, computed tomography (CT) colonography and colon capsule endoscopy have the highest sensitivity for colorectal neoplasia. Molecular tests which are based on the detection of genetic and epigenetic changes of DNA released by the tumor into feces or blood have a high potential and could potentially replace occult blood tests in the future. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: Colonoscopy is the primary instrument for screening for colorectal neoplasia. Fecal occult blood testing should only be performed if colonoscopy is denied and CT colonography has not yet been approved for screening in Germany.
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.