Trial reportJournal of general internal medicine2015
The Effectiveness of a Physician-Only and Physician-Patient Intervention on Colorectal Cancer Screening Discussions Between Providers and African American and Latino Patients.
Trial report in Journal of general internal medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Racial and socioeconomic disparities in lung cancer screening in the United States: A systematic review.CA: a cancer journal for clinicians · 2021Pooled it
- Health Literacy Interventions in Cancer: a Systematic Review.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021Pooled it
- Effectiveness of a Comprehensive Health Literacy Consultation Skills Training for Undergraduate Medical Students: A Randomized Controlled Trial.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Trial
- Physician Intervention and Chinese Americans' Colorectal Cancer Screening.American journal of health behavior · 2018Trial
- Exploring knowledge, attitude, practices and barriers toward colorectal cancer screening in the United Arab Emirates: a mixed-methods study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Article
- A Lung Cancer Screening Education Program Impacts both Referral Rates and Provider and Medical Assistant Knowledge at Two Federally Qualified Health Centers.Clinical lung cancer · 2022Article
- Motivations and concerns of patients considering participation in an implementation study of a hereditary cancer risk assessment program in diverse primary care settings.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2022Article
- Focused Education Increases Hepatocellular Cancer Screening in Patients with Cirrhosis Regardless of Functional Health Literacy.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2021Article
- Identifying actionable strategies: using Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR)-informed interviews to evaluate the implementation of a multilevel intervention to improve colorectal cancer screening.Implementation science communications · 2021Article
- Colonoscopy education delivered via the patient portal does not improve adherence to scheduled first-time screening colonoscopy.Endoscopy international open · 2020Article
- Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake: Differences Between Rural and Urban Privately-Insured Population.Frontiers in public health · 2020Article
- Positive Outcomes of a Comprehensive Health Literacy Communication Training for Health Professionals in Three European Countries: A Multi-centre Pre-post Intervention Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Factors Influencing Adherence to Recommended Colorectal Cancer Surveillance: Experiences and Behaviors of Colorectal Cancer Survivors.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2019Article
- The impact of travel time on colorectal cancer stage at diagnosis in a privately insured population.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Using Intervention Mapping to Develop Health Education Components to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening in Puerto Rico.Frontiers in public health · 2017Article
- Tailored information increases patient/physician discussion of colon cancer risk and testing: The Cancer Risk Intake System trial.Preventive medicine reports · 2016Article
- Colorectal Cancer Screening in Vulnerable Patients: Promoting Informed and Shared Decisions.American journal of preventive medicine · 2016Article
- Capsule Commentary on Dolan et al., The Effectiveness of a Physician-Only and Physician-Patient Intervention on Colorectal Cancer Screening Discussions Between Providers and African American and Latino Patients.Journal of general internal medicine · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPhysician recommendation of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is a critical facilitator of screening completion. Providing patients a choice of screening options may increase CRC screening completion, particularly among racial and ethnic minorities.
objectiveOur purpose was to assess the effectiveness of physician-only and physician-patient interventions on increasing rates of CRC screening discussions as compared to usual care.
designThis study was quasi-experimental. Clinics were allocated to intervention or usual care; patients in intervention clinics were randomized to receipt of patient intervention.
participantsPatients aged 50 to 75 years, due for CRC screening, receiving care at either a federally qualified health care center or an academic health center participated in the study.
interventionIntervention physicians received continuous quality improvement and communication skills training. Intervention patients watched an educational video immediately before their appointment. MAIN MEASURES: Rates of patient-reported 1) CRC screening discussions, and 2) discussions of more than one screening test. KEY
resultsThe physician-patient intervention (n = 167) resulted in higher rates of CRC screening discussions compared to both physician-only intervention (n = 183; 61.1 % vs.50.3 %, p = 0.008) and usual care (n = 153; 61.1 % vs. 34.0 % p = 0.03). More discussions of specific CRC screening tests and discussions of more than one test occurred in the intervention arms than in usual care (44.6 % vs. 22.9 %,p = 0.03) and (5.1 % vs. 2.0 %, p = 0.036), respectively, but discussion of more than one test was uncommon. Across all arms, 143 patients (28.4 %) reported discussion of colonoscopy only; 21 (4.2 %) reported discussion of both colonoscopy and stool tests.
conclusionsCompared to usual care and a physician-only intervention, a physician-patient intervention increased rates of CRC screening discussions, yet discussions overwhelmingly focused solely on colonoscopy. In underserved patient populations where access to colonoscopy may be limited, interventions encouraging discussions of both stool tests and colonoscopy may be needed.
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.