Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24505055›Full record

ArticleHealth promotion practice2014

Analysis of the benefits and costs of a national campaign to promote colorectal cancer screening: CDC's screen for life-national colorectal cancer action campaign.

Donatus U Ekwueme, David H Howard, Cynthia A Gelb, Sun Hee Rim, Crystale P Cooper

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health promotion practice, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03965325 (FOcUs on Colorectal CAncer oUtcomes), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03965325 completednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

FOcUs on Colorectal CAncer oUtcomes: Long-Term Study

TypeobservationalSponsorIHU StrasbourgRan2019 to 2024Enrolled133ConditionsColorectal CancerArmsUse of a standardized set to collect clinical and patient-centered data, to assess the trend of the Global Health Status overtime in colorectal cancer patients
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Ovarian Cancer Knowledge in Women and Providers Following Education with Inside Knowledge Campaign Materials.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2018
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Donatus U EkwuemeCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA dce3@cdc.gov.
David H HowardEmory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Cynthia A GelbCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Sun Hee RimCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Crystale P CooperSoltera Center for Cancer Prevention and Control, Tucson, AZ, USA.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention · USEmory University · US

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Screen for Life: National Colorectal Cancer Action Campaign (SFL) is one of the longest running national multimedia campaigns to promote colorectal cancer screening. Since its inception in 1999, no study has quantified the benefits and costs of SFL. We modeled the impact of SFL campaign on screening rates, assuming that the effect size would range from 0.5% to 10% of the unscreened population exposed to the campaign in the last 14 years. Given the estimated benefits of the campaign and costs, we calculated the cost per person screened (2012 dollars). We hypothesize that if 0.5% of the population exposed to campaign messages were screened for colorectal cancer, an additional 251,000 previously unscreened individuals would be screened. The average cost of SFL per person screened would be $2.44. On the other hand, if 10% of the population exposed to campaign messages were screened, an additional 5.01 million individuals would be screened. The average cost per person screened would be $0.12. Results indicate that SFL improves screening rates at a relatively low cost per person screened. The findings in this study provide an important starting point and benchmark for future research efforts to determine the benefits and costs of health communication campaigns to promote cancer prevention.

Indexed as

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S.Colorectal NeoplasmsCost-Benefit AnalysisHealth PromotionHumansMass ScreeningMultimediaNational Health ProgramsUnited Statesbenefitscancer prevention and controlcolorectal cancercostshealth communicationhealth promotionmass media

Identifiers

PMID24505055
PMCPMC5836740
OpenAlexW2136085127

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.