ArticleBMC public health2013
Individual- and provider-level factors associated with colorectal cancer screening in accordance with guideline recommendation: a community-level perspective across varying levels of risk.
Article in BMC public health, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Barriers to cancer screening uptake and approaches to overcome them: a systematic literature review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Patient Beliefs About Colon Cancer Screening.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2016Trial
- Randomized trial to increase colorectal cancer screening in an ethnically diverse sample of first-degree relatives.Cancer · 2015Trial
- Early Adoption of a Multitarget Stool DNA Test for Colorectal Cancer Screening.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2017Article
- Review
- Colonoscopy screening among US adults aged 40 or older with a family history of colorectal cancer.Preventing chronic disease · 2015Article
- Finding medical care for colorectal cancer symptoms: experiences among those facing financial barriers.Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education · 2015Article
- Public health and cooperative group partnership: a colorectal cancer intervention.Seminars in oncology nursing · 2014Article
- Health Insurance Status as a Predictor of Mode of Colon Cancer Detection but Not Stage at Diagnosis: Implications for Early Detection.Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundParticipation rates in colorectal cancer screening (CRC) are low. Relatively little is known about screening uptake across varying levels of risk and across population groups. The purpose of the current study was to identify factors associated with (i) ever receiving colorectal cancer (CRC) testing; (ii) risk-appropriate CRC screening in accordance with guidelines; and (iii) recent colonoscopy screening.
methods1592 at-risk persons (aged 56-88 years) were randomly selected from the Hunter Community Study (HCS), Australia. Participants self-reported family history of CRC was used to quantify risk in accordance with national screening guidelines.
results1117 participants returned a questionnaire; 760 respondents were eligible for screening and analysis. Ever receiving CRC testing was significantly more likely for persons: aged 65-74 years; who had discussed with a doctor their family history of CRC or had ever received screening advice. For respondents "at or slightly above average risk", guideline-appropriate screening was significantly more likely for persons: aged 65-74 years; with higher household income; and who had ever received screening advice. For respondents at "moderately or potentially high risk", guideline-appropriate screening was significantly more likely for persons: with private health insurance and who had discussed their family history of CRC with a doctor. Colonoscopy screening was significantly more likely for persons: who had ever smoked; discussed their family history of CRC with a doctor; or had ever received screening advice.
conclusionsThe level of risk-appropriate screening varied across populations groups. Interventions that target population groups less likely to engage in CRC screening are pivotal for decreasing screening inequalities.
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.