ArticlePloS one2014
Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening protocols in urban Chinese populations.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Quality of Health Economic Evaluations in Mainland China: A Comparison of Peer-Reviewed Articles in Chinese and in English.Applied health economics and health policy · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Water Exchange Method Significantly Improves Adenoma Detection Rate: A Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2017Trial
- Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of extending risk-stratified colorectal cancer screening: evidence from China's first province-wide program.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- 2021 Clinical Practice Guidelines on Periodic Health Examination.Acta medica Philippina · 2026Article
- Trends in colorectal cancer screening compliance and incidence among 60- to 74-year-olds in China.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- A risk scoring system for advanced colorectal neoplasia in high-risk participants to improve current colorectal cancer screening in Tianjin, China.BMC gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of colorectal cancer screening in Shanghai, China: A modelling study.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing for colorectal cancer screening in China.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of a community-based colorectal cancer screening program in Shanghai, China.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Colorectal Cancer Screening With High Risk-Factor Questionnaire and Fecal Immunochemical Tests Among 5, 947, 986 Asymptomatic Population: A Population-Based Study.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Microsimulation Model for Prevention and Intervention of Coloretal Cancer in China (MIMIC-CRC): Development, Calibration, Validation, and Application.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- The implementation of colorectal cancer screening interventions in low-and middle-income countries: a scoping review.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- Article
- Cancer incidence and mortality in Zhejiang Province, Southeast China, 2016: a population-based study.Chinese medical journal · 2021Article
- Article
- Colorectal Cancer Screening Modalities in Chinese Population: Practice and Lessons in Pudong New Area of Shanghai, China.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Article
- Article
- Internet videos and colorectal cancer in mainland China: a content analysis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2018Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Preliminary Screening Methods for Colorectal Cancer in a Mass Program.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) takes a second and fourth position in the incidence and mortality lists respectively among all malignant tumors in urban populations in China. This study was designed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two different CRC screening protocols: faecal occult blood test (FOBT) alone, and FOBT plus a high-risk factor questionnaire (HRFQ) as the respective initial screens, followed by colonoscopy. We developed a Markov model to simulate the progression of a cohort of 100,000 average risk asymptomatic individuals moving through a defined series of states between the ages of 40 to 74 years. The parameters used for the modeling came from the CESP (Comparison and Evaluation of Screening Programs for Colorectal Cancer in Urban Communities in China) study and published literature. Eight CRC screening scenarios were tested in the Markov model. The cost-effectiveness of CRC screening under each scenario was measured by an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) compared with a scenario without CRC screening. The study revealed that a combined use of FOBT and HRFQ is preferable in CRC screening programs as an initial screening instrument. Annual FOBT+HRFQ screening is recommended for those who have a negative initial result and those who have a positive result but have failed to continue to colonoscopic examination. Repeated colonoscopy (for those with a positive result in initial screening but a negative colonoscopy result) should be performed at a ten-year interval instead of one-year. Such a protocol would cost 7732 Yuan per life year saved, which is the most cost-effective option. In conclusion, the current Chinese Trial Version for CRC Screening Strategy should be revised in line with the most cost-effective protocol identified in this study.
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.