ArticleCancer2013
Moving forward: using the experience of the CDCs' Colorectal Cancer Screening Demonstration Program to guide future colorectal cancer programming efforts.
Article in Cancer, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Free Fecal Immunochemical Test Disbursement in Eight Family Physician Offices.Journal of community health · 2015Trial
- Protocol paper for an implementation science approach to promoting colorectal cancer screening in Federally Qualified Health Center Clinics: A stepped-wedge, multilevel intervention trial.Contemporary clinical trials · 2026Article
- The health belief model and colorectal cancer screening in the general population: A systematic review.Preventive medicine reports · 2020Review
- The Impact of Massachusetts Health Reform on Colorectal and Breast Cancer Stage at Diagnosis.Medical care · 2020Article
- Regional Differences in Colorectal Cancer Mortality Between 2000 and 2013 in Republic of Korea.Journal of epidemiology · 2019Article
- Patient-Initiated Colonoscopy Scheduling Effectively Increases Colorectal Cancer Screening Adherence.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2019Article
- Identifying optimal approaches to scale up colorectal cancer screening: an overview of the centers for disease control and prevention (CDC)'s learning laboratory.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2019Review
- Comparative Evaluation of Preliminary Screening Methods for Colorectal Cancer in a Mass Program.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2017Article
- The impact of preventive screening resource distribution on geographic and population-based disparities in colorectal cancer in Mississippi.BMC research notes · 2015Article
- Fecal-based colorectal cancer screening among the uninsured in northern Manhattan.American journal of preventive medicine · 2014Article
- Health behaviors and risk factors among American Indians and Alaska Natives, 2000-2010.American journal of public health · 2014Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) established and supported a 4-year Colorectal Cancer Screening Demonstration Program (CRCSDP) from 2005 to 2009 for low-income, under- or uninsured men and women aged 50-64 at 5 sites in the United States.
methodsA multiple methods evaluation was conducted including 1) a longitudinal, comparative case study of program implementation, 2) the collection and analysis of client-level screening and diagnostic services outcome data, and 3) the collection and analysis of program- and patient-level cost data.
resultsSeveral themes emerged from the results reported in the series of articles in this Supplement. These included the benefit of building on an existing infrastructure, strengths and weakness of both the 2 most frequently used screening tests (colonoscopy and fecal occult blood tests), variability in costs of maintaining this screening program, and the importance of measuring the quality of screening tests. Population-level evaluation questions could not be answered because of the small size of the participating population and the limited time frame of the evaluation. The comprehensive evaluation of the program determined overall feasibility of this effort.
conclusionsCritical lessons learned through the implementation and evaluation of the CDC's CRCSDP led to the development of a larger population-based program, the CDC's Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP).
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.