Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23498096›Full record

Trial reportAmerican journal of preventive medicine2013

Promoting colorectal cancer screening discussion: a randomized controlled trial.

Shannon M Christy, Susan M Perkins, Yan Tong, Connie Krier, Victoria L Champion, Celette Sugg Skinner, Jeffrey K Springston, Thomas F Imperiale, Susan M Rawl

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in American journal of preventive medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00672828 (Promoting Colon Cancer Screening Among African Americans), which is not on this map. Cited by 34 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 5 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.

NCT00672828 nacompletednot on this map

Promoting Colon Cancer Screening Among African Americans

TypeinterventionalSponsorIndiana UniversityRan2008 to 2012Enrolled693ConditionsColorectal CancerArmsNon-tailored CRC screening brochure, Interactive computer intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Patient-mediated interventions to improve professional practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Use of Decision Aids with Minority Patients: a Systematic Review.Journal of general internal medicine · 2016
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Impact of Risk Assessment and Tailored versus Nontailored Risk Information on Colorectal Cancer Testing in Primary Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2015
    Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Internet-based Tailored Virtual Human Health Intervention to Promote Colorectal Cancer Screening: Design Guidelines from Two User Studies.Intelligent virtual agents : ... International Workshop, IVA ... proceedings. IVA (Conference) · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

9 authors.

Shannon M ChristyDepartment of Psychology, Purdue School of Science, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, Indiana.
Susan M PerkinsSchool of Medicine, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Yan TongSchool of Medicine, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Connie KrierSchool of Nursing, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Victoria L ChampionSchool of Nursing, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Celette Sugg SkinnerHarold C. Simmons Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
Jeffrey K SpringstonCollege of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia.
Thomas F ImperialeSchool of Medicine, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Susan M RawlSchool of Nursing, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana. Electronic address: srawl@iupui.edu.

Funding

Tumor Microenvironment and Metastasis ProgramP30CA082709 · NCI · INDIANA UNIV-PURDUE UNIV AT INDIANAPOLIS · PI Jun Wan · 1999 to 2026
$59.3M
Training in Research for Behavioral Oncology and Cancer Control ProgramR25CA117865 · NCI · INDIANA UNIV-PURDUE UNIV AT INDIANAPOLIS · PI CHAMPION, VICTORIA LEE · 2006 to 2015
$4.1M
Interdisciplinary Training in Cancer Prevention and ControlT32CA117865 · NCI · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI Victoria Lee Champion, Catherine E Mosher · 2016 to 2026
$2.4M
Promoting Colon Cancer Screening Among African AmericansR01CA115983 · NCI · INDIANA UNIV-PURDUE UNIV AT INDIANAPOLIS · PI RAWL, SUSAN M · 2006 to 2010
$2.3M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA082709NCI NIH HHS R01 CA115983NCI NIH HHS R25 CA117865NCI NIH HHS R25 CA117865-06NCI NIH HHS T32 CA117865
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProvider recommendation is a predictor of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. PURPOSE: To compare the effects of two clinic-based interventions on patient-provider discussions about CRC screening.

designTwo-group RCT with data collected at baseline and 1 week post-intervention. SETTING/

participantsAfrican-American patients that were non-adherent to CRC screening recommendations (n=693) with a primary care visit between 2008 and 2010 in one of 11 urban primary care clinics.

interventionParticipants received either a computer-delivered tailored CRC screening intervention or a nontailored informational brochure about CRC screening immediately prior to their primary care visit.

main outcome measuresBetween-group differences in odds of having had a CRC screening discussion about a colon test, with and without adjusting for demographic, clinic, health literacy, health belief, and social support variables, were examined as predictors of a CRC screening discussion using logistic regression. Intervention effects on CRC screening test order by PCPs were examined using logistic regression. Analyses were conducted in 2011 and 2012.

resultsCompared to the brochure group, greater proportions of those in the computer-delivered tailored intervention group reported having had a discussion with their provider about CRC screening (63% vs 48%, OR=1.81, p<0.001). Predictors of a discussion about CRC screening included computer group participation, younger age, reason for visit, being unmarried, colonoscopy self-efficacy, and family member/friend recommendation (all p-values <0.05).

conclusionsThe computer-delivered tailored intervention was more effective than a nontailored brochure at stimulating patient-provider discussions about CRC screening. Those who received the computer-delivered intervention also were more likely to have a CRC screening test (fecal occult blood test or colonoscopy) ordered by their PCP.

trial registrationThis study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT00672828.

Indexed as

Patient ComplianceAge FactorsBlack or African AmericanColonoscopyColorectal NeoplasmsComputersFemaleHealth PromotionHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedOccult BloodPamphletsPhysician-Patient Relations

Identifiers

PMID23498096
PMCPMC3601582

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.