Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23706029›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2013

Gender differences in attitudes impeding colorectal cancer screening.

Paul Ritvo, Ronald E Myers, Lawrence Paszat, Mardie Serenity, Daniel F Perez, Linda Rabeneck

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 46 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 100 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Assessing Colorectal Cancer Screening Barriers by Two Methods.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2018
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Gender and sex differences in colorectal cancer screening, diagnosis and treatment.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Masculinity and colorectal cancer screening: a cross-sectional study of men attending state fairs in Minnesota and Wisconsin.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Paul RitvoSchool of Kinesiology and Health Science, York University, 136 Chemistry Building, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, ON M3J 1P3, Canada. pritvo@yorku.ca
Ronald E Myers
Lawrence Paszat
Mardie Serenity
Daniel F Perez
Linda Rabeneck
York University · CACanada Research Chairs · CAInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences · CASunnybrook Health Science Centre · CAThomas Jefferson University · US

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundColorectal cancer screening (CRCS) is the only type of cancer screening where both genders reduce risks by similar proportions with identical procedures. It is an important context for examining gender differences in disease-prevention, as CRCS significantly reduces mortality via early detection and prevention. In efforts to increase screening adherence, there is increasing acknowledgment that obstructive attitudes prevent CRCS uptake. Precise identification of the gender differences in obstructive attitudes is necessary to improve uptake promotion. This study randomly sampled unscreened, screening - eligible individuals in Ontario, employing semi-structured interviews to elicit key differences in attitudinal obstructions towards colorectal cancer screening with the aim of deriving informative differences useful in planning promotions of screening uptake.

methodsN = 81 participants (49 females, 32 males), 50 years and above, with no prior CRCS, were contacted via random-digit telephone dialing, and consented via phone-mail contact. Altogether, N = 4,459 calls were made to yield N = 85 participants (1.9% response rate) of which N = 4 participants did not complete interviews. All subjects were eligible for free-of-charge CRCS in Ontario, and each was classified, via standard interview by CRCS screening decision-stage. Telephone-based, semi-structured interviews (SSIs) were employed to investigate gender differences in CRCS attitudes, using questions focused on 5 attitudinal domains: 1) Screening experience at the time of interview; 2) Barriers to adherence; 3) Predictors of Adherence; 4) Pain-anxiety experiences related to CRCS; 5) Gender-specific experiences re: CRCS, addressing all three modalities accessible through Ontario's program: a) fecal occult blood testing; b) flexible sigmoidoscopy; c) colonoscopy.

resultsInterview transcript analyses indicated divergent themes related to CRCS for each gender: 1) bodily intrusion, 2) perforation anxiety, and 3) embarrassment for females and; 1) avoidant procrastination with underlying fatalism, 2) unnecessary health care and 3) uncomfortable vulnerability for males. Respondents adopted similar attitudes towards fecal occult blood testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy, and were comparable in decision stage across tests. Gender differences were neither closely tied to screening stage nor modality. Women had more consistent physician relationships, were more screening-knowledgeable and better able to articulate views on screening. Men reported less consistent physician relationships, were less knowledgeable and kept decision-making processes vague and emotionally distanced (i.e. at 'arm's length').

conclusionsMarked differences were observed in obstructive CRCS attitudes per gender. Females articulated reservations about CRCS-associated distress and males suppressed negative views while ambiguously procrastinating about the task of completing screening. Future interventions could seek to reduce CRCS-related stress (females) and address the need to overcome procrastination (males).

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthEarly Detection of CancerAgedAged, 80 and overColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth Services AccessibilityHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedOntarioSex FactorsSocioeconomic Factors

Identifiers

PMID23706029
PMCPMC3672022
OpenAlexW2157037223

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.