ArticleCancer2013
Lessons learned from the CDC's Colorectal Cancer Screening Demonstration Program.
Article in Cancer, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- A culturally and linguistically salient pilot intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening among Latinos receiving care in a Federally Qualified Health Center.Health education research · 2019Trial
- The Impact of Massachusetts Health Reform on Colorectal and Breast Cancer Stage at Diagnosis.Medical care · 2020Article
- The CDC Colorectal Cancer Control Program, 2009-2015.Preventing chronic disease · 2019Article
- Regional Differences in Colorectal Cancer Mortality Between 2000 and 2013 in Republic of Korea.Journal of epidemiology · 2019Article
- Costs of colorectal cancer screening provision in CDC's Colorectal Cancer Control Program: Comparisons of colonoscopy and FOBT/FIT based screening.Evaluation and program planning · 2017Article
- Providers' knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to colorectal cancer control in Brazil.Preventive medicine · 2015Article
- The impact of preventive screening resource distribution on geographic and population-based disparities in colorectal cancer in Mississippi.BMC research notes · 2015Article
- Patients' perceptions of colorectal cancer screening tests and preparatory education in federally qualified health centers.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2015Article
- 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This report briefly summarizes 13 articles in this dedicated supplement to Cancer documenting the full implementation and evaluation of CDC's Colorectal Cancer Screening Demonstration Program (CRCSDP). The supplement includes 3 articles that describe clinical and quality outcomes; 2 articles that describe programmatic and clinical costs; 3 that were based on a multiple case study, using qualitative methods to describe the overall implementation experience of this initiative; and 4 articles written by and about individual program sites. The comprehensive, multi-methods evaluation conducted alongside the program produced many important lessons regarding the design, start-up, and implementation of colorectal cancer screening in this high-need population, and paved the way for the CDC to establish a larger, population-based colorectal cancer control initiative, broadly aligned with expectations of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act through its population-based emphasis on using a health systems approach to increase colorectal cancer screening. Cancer 2013;119(15 suppl):2817-9. © 2013 American Cancer Society.
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.