ArticleAmerican journal of lifestyle medicine2012
State of the Art Review: Colorectal Cancer Screening.
Article in American journal of lifestyle medicine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- From Crypts to Cancer: A Holistic Perspective on Colorectal Carcinogenesis and Therapeutic Strategies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- The impact of supplementary narrative-based information on colorectal cancer screening beliefs and intention.BMC cancer · 2015Article
- Use of blood-based biomarkers for early diagnosis and surveillance of colorectal cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2014Review
- Immunochemical fecal occult blood test for detection of advanced colonic adenomas and colorectal cancer: comparison with colonoscopy results.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Although colorectal cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the U.S., the burden of this disease could be dramatically reduced by increased utilization of screening. Evidence-based recommendations and guidelines from national societies recommend screening all average risk adults starting at age fifty. However, the myriad of screening options and slight differences in screening recommendations between guidelines may lead to confusion among patients and their primary care providers. This goal of this review is to briefly summarize the colorectal cancer screening guidelines issued by three major organizations, compare their recommendations, and address emerging issues in colorectal cancer screening.
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.