ArticleJournal of primary care & community health2013
Evaluation of fecal immunochemical tests for colorectal cancer screening.
Article in Journal of primary care & community health, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mailed Outreach for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Community Health Centers: The CARES Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA internal medicine · 2026Trial
- Comparative Performance of Common Fecal Immunochemical Tests : A Cross-Sectional Study.Annals of internal medicine · 2024Article
- Comparative effectiveness of five fecal immunochemical tests using colonoscopy as the gold standard: study protocol.Contemporary clinical trials · 2021Article
- An early report of a screening program for colorectal cancer in Guangzhou, China.Annals of translational medicine · 2019Article
- Learning to be More Positive About FIT.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2018Article
- Circulating tumor DNA in patients with colorectal adenomas: assessment of detectability and genetic heterogeneity.Cell death & disease · 2018Article
- Which Fecal Immunochemical Test Should I Choose?Journal of primary care & community health · 2017Review
- Effect of Ambient Temperature Variations on Positivity of Manual Fecal Immunochemical Tests.Journal of primary care & community health · 2015Article
- Test characteristics of faecal immunochemical tests (FIT) compared with optical colonoscopy.Journal of medical screening · 2014Article
- "Finding the Right FIT": Rural Patient Preferences for Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) Characteristics.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFMArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) screening reduces the mortality due to CRC. It is important for health care providers to be aware of the variation in the products available for CRC screening. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to summarize the accuracy of results of individual fecal immunochemical test (FIT) products across pathology proficiency testing programs.
methodsSecondary data analysis of proficiency testing programs' FIT results.
resultsFour of 7 proficiency testing program's FIT evaluations were obtained for a 2-year period. Fourteen unique FIT brands were evaluated by at least 1 of the 4 proficiency testing programs. Five of the products performed similarly with sensitivities ranging from 98.1% to 98.8% and specificities from 98.1% to 99.6%. Ninety-three percent of the FIT tests completed were manual Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-waived FITs.
conclusionsAbout two thirds of the commonly used FIT products performed acceptably on spiked samples of human hemoglobin. However, some had low sensitivity and specificity and probably should not be used for population-based or other screening. Further investigation to determine appropriate, reliable products for fecal occult blood testing is warranted.
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.