Trial reportThe Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association2014
Evaluation of a home-based colorectal cancer screening intervention in a rural state.
Trial report in The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 5 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- One- versus two-sample fecal immunochemical testing for colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis of participation, diagnostic performance, and cost-effectiveness.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Pooled it
- Single-round performance of colorectal cancer screening programs: a network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.BMC medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Interventions to improve access to cancer care in underserved populations in high income countries: a systematic review.Oncology reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Mailed Outreach Is Superior to Usual Care Alone for Colorectal Cancer Screening in the USA: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2019Pooled it
- Evaluation of Interventions Intended to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA internal medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Comparative effectiveness of two interventions to increase colorectal cancer screening among females living in the rural Midwest.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2024Trial
- Trial
- An RCT of Fecal Immunochemical Test Colorectal Cancer Screening in Veterans Without Recent Primary Care.American journal of preventive medicine · 2020Trial
- A Randomized Controlled Trial of Opt-in Versus Opt-Out Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2018Trial
- Trial
- Interventions to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake in Rural Settings: A Scoping Review.Preventing chronic disease · 2025Article
- Article
- Improving colorectal cancer screening in rural primary care: Preliminary effectiveness and implementation of a collaborative mailed fecal immunochemical test pilot.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2023Article
- Implementation of a mailed faecal immunochemical test programme for colorectal cancer screening among Veterans.BMJ open quality · 2022Article
- Cancer Screening Among Rural and Urban Clinics During COVID-19: A Multistate Qualitative Study.JCO oncology practice · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- Validity and feasibility of a self-administered home vision examination in Yueqing, China: a cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2020Article
- Two Medicaid health plans' models and motivations for improving colorectal cancer screening rates.Translational behavioral medicine · 2020Article
- Who Performs Colonoscopy? Workforce Trends Over Space and Time.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeDistance from health care facilities can be a barrier to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, especially for colonoscopy. Alternatively, an improved at-home stool-based screening tool, the fecal immunochemical test (FIT), requires only a single sample and has a better sensitivity-specificity balance compared to traditional guaiac fecal occult blood tests. Our objective was to determine if FITs mailed to asymptomatic, average-risk patients overdue for screening resulted in higher screening rates versus mailing educational materials alone or no intervention (ie, usual care).
methodsVeterans ages 51-64, asymptomatic, at average risk for CRC, overdue for screening and in a veterans administration (VA) catchment area covering a large rural population were randomly assigned to 3 groups: (1) education only (Ed) group: mailed CRC educational materials and a survey of screening history and preferences (N = 499); (2) FIT group: mailed the FIT, plus educational materials and survey (N = 500); and (3) usual care (UC) group: received no mailings (N = 500).
findingsAt 6 months postintervention, 21% of the FIT group had received CRC screening by any method compared to 6% of the Ed group (and 6% of the UC group) (P < .0001). Of the 105 respondents from the FIT group, 71 (68%) were eligible to take the FIT. Of those, 64 (90%) completed the FIT and 8 (12%) tested positive.
conclusionsThis low-intensity intervention of mailing FITs to average risk patients overdue for screening resulted in a significantly higher screening rate than educational materials alone or usual care, and may be of particular interest in rural areas.
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.