Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23212726›Full record

GuidelineEndoscopy2013

European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis: overview and introduction to the full supplement publication.

European Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines Working Group, L von Karsa, J Patnick, N Segnan, W Atkin, S Halloran, I Lansdorp-Vogelaar, N Malila, S Minozzi, S Moss and 100 more

5 registry-linked trialsAbstract readPractice Guideline
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Guideline in Endoscopy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 5 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 231 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
231citing papers in PubMed, 12 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.

NCT04348058 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Telephone Services for Participation Improvement in Colorectal Cancer Screening: a Randomized Health Services Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorMaria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of OncologyRan2020 to 2021Enrolled6,300ConditionsParticipation Rate, PatientArmsTelephone recruitment to screening colonoscopy, Combined methods recruitment to screening colonoscopy
NCT04894708 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Prospective Randomized Study on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (Fujifilm) for Polyp Detection in Colonoscopy

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversitätsklinikum Hamburg-EppendorfRan2020 to 2024Enrolled1,572ConditionsScreening Colonoscopy, Colonoscopic Control After Polypectomy, Suspected Colon PolypsArmscolonoscopy
NCT04906343 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Endoscopic Surveillance in Patients With Serrated Polyposis Syndrome and Low-risk of Advanced Neoplasia.

TypeinterventionalSponsorHospital Universitario de MóstolesRan2021 to 2024Enrolled144ConditionsColonic Polyp, Colonic Neoplasms, Colonic Cancer, Serrated PolyposisArmsColonoscopy
NCT05163236 completednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Sensitivity of Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) for Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening and Interval Cancer Risk : a Population Based Study

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity Hospital, BrestRan2021 to 2021Enrolled1,149ConditionsColorectal Neoplasms Malignant, Colonoscopy, Early Detection of Cancer, FemaleArmsPositive fecal immunochemical test (FIT), Negative fecal immunochemical test (FIT), Fecal immunochemical test (FIT) not performed
NCT05609396 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Interventions to Improve Bowel Cancer Screening Uptake in Ireland: a 2x2 Factorial Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorDublin City UniversityRan2022 to 2022Enrolled8,734ConditionsColorectal CancerArmsBehaviorally enhanced reminder letter
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

231 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Geographical Disparities in Faecal Immunochemical Test-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Participation and Positivity Rates: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. The Effects of the Nurse Navigation Program in Promoting Colorectal Cancer Screening Behaviors: a Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2020
    Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

171 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

110 authors.

European Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines Working GroupInternational Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
L von Karsa
J Patnick
N Segnan
W Atkin
S Halloran
I Lansdorp-Vogelaar
N Malila
S Minozzi
S Moss
P Quirke
R J Steele
M Vieth
L Aabakken
L Altenhofen
R Ancelle-Park
N Antoljak
A Anttila
P Armaroli
S Arrossi
J Austoker
R Banzi
C Bellisario
J Blom
H Brenner
M Bretthauer
M Camargo Cancela
G Costamagna
J Cuzick
M Dai
J Daniel
E Dekker
N Delicata
S Ducarroz
H Erfkamp
J A Espinàs
J Faivre
L Faulds Wood
A Flugelman
S Frkovic-Grazio
B Geller
L Giordano
G Grazzini
J Green
C Hamashima
C Herrmann
P Hewitson
G Hoff
I Holten
R Jover
M F Kaminski
E J Kuipers
J Kurtinaitis
R Lambert
G Launoy
W Lee
R Leicester
M Leja
D Lieberman
T Lignini
E Lucas
E Lynge
S Mádai
J Marinho
J Maučec Zakotnik
G Minoli
C Monk
A Morais
R Muwonge
M Nadel
L Neamtiu
M Peris Tuser
M Pignone
C Pox
M Primic-Zakelj
J Psaila
L Rabeneck
D Ransohoff
M Rasmussen
J Regula
J Ren
G Rennert
J Rey
R H Riddell
M Risio
V Rodrigues
H Saito
C Sauvaget
A Scharpantgen
W Schmiegel
C Senore
M Siddiqi
D Sighoko
R Smith
S Smith
S Suchanek
E Suonio
W Tong
S Törnberg
E Van Cutsem
L Vignatelli
P Villain
L Voti
H Watanabe
J Watson
S Winawer
G Young
V Zaksas
M Zappa
R Valori

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Population-based screening for early detection and treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC) and precursor lesions, using evidence-based methods, can be effective in populations with a significant burden of the disease provided the services are of high quality. Multidisciplinary, evidence-based guidelines for quality assurance in CRC screening and diagnosis have been developed by experts in a project co-financed by the European Union. The 450-page guidelines were published in book format by the European Commission in 2010.  They include 10 chapters and over 250 recommendations, individually graded according to the strength of the recommendation and the supporting evidence. Adoption of the recommendations can improve and maintain the quality and effectiveness of an entire screening process, including identification and invitation of the target population, diagnosis and management of the disease and appropriate surveillance in people with detected lesions. To make the principles, recommendations and standards in the guidelines known to a wider professional and scientific community and to facilitate their use in the scientific literature, the original content is presented in journal format in an open-access Supplement of Endoscopy. The editors have prepared the present overview to inform readers of the comprehensive scope and content of the guidelines.

Indexed as

Quality Assurance, Health CareColorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerEuropeEvidence-Based MedicineHumansMass Screening

Identifiers

PMID23212726
PMCPMC4482205

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.