ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2015
Risk assessment and clinical decision making for colorectal cancer screening.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01596582 (Impact of Risk Stratification on Shared Decision-Making for Colorectal Cancer Screening), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Impact of Risk Stratification on Shared Decision-Making for Colorectal Cancer Screening
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Why aren't they used? Systematic review of barriers to implementation of clinical decision support systems for early cancer detection in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Pooled it
- The implementation challenge of computerised clinical decision support systems for the detection of disease in primary care: systematic review and recommendations.Implementation science : IS · 2025Pooled it
- Acceptability and perceptions of personalised risk-based cancer screening among health-care professionals and the general public: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The Lancet. Public health · 2025Pooled it
- Risk Stratification and Shared Decision Making for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2016Trial
- Context factors in clinical decision-making: a scoping review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- A scoping review of risk-stratified bowel screening: current evidence, future directions.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2022Article
- Using HIV Risk Prediction Tools to Identify Candidates for Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis: Perspectives from Patients and Primary Care Providers.AIDS patient care and STDs · 2019Article
- Gut microbiome identifies risk for colorectal polyps.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2019Article
- A Risk Prediction Index for Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia at Screening Colonoscopy.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundShared decision making (SDM) related to test preference has been advocated as a potentially effective strategy for increasing adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, yet primary care providers (PCPs) are often reluctant to comply with patient preferences if they differ from their own. Risk stratification advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) provides a rational strategy for reconciling these differences.
objectiveTo assess the importance of risk stratification in PCP decision making related to test preference for average-risk patients and receptivity to use of an electronic risk assessment tool for ACN to facilitate SDM.
designMixed methods, including qualitative key informant interviews and a cross-sectional survey.
participantsPCPs at an urban, academic safety-net institution. MAIN MEASURES: Screening preferences, factors influencing patient recommendations and receptivity to use of a risk stratification tool. KEY
resultsNine PCPs participated in interviews and 57 completed the survey. Despite an overwhelming preference for colonoscopy by 95% of respondents, patient risk (67%) and patient preferences (63%) were more influential in their decision making than patient comorbidities (31%; P < 0.001). Age was the single most influential risk factor (excluding family history), with <20% of respondents choosing factors other than age. Most respondents reported that they would be likely to use a risk stratification tool in their practice either 'often' (43%) or sometimes (53%).
conclusionsRisk stratification was perceived to be important in clinical decision making, yet few providers considered risk factors other than age for average-risk patients. Providers were receptive to the use of a risk assessment tool for ACN when recommending an appropriate screening test for select patients.
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.