Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26046014›Full record

ArticlePreventive medicine reports2015

Testing Interventions to Motivate and Educate (TIME): A multi-level intervention to improve colorectal cancer screening.

Jessica L Krok-Schoen, Gregory S Young, Michael L Pennell, Paul L Reiter, Mira L Katz, Douglas M Post, Cathy M Tatum, Electra D Paskett

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01568151 (Testing Interventions to Motivate and Educate), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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.

NCT01568151 nacompletednot on this map

Testing Interventions to Motivate and Educate

TypeinterventionalSponsorOhio State University Comprehensive Cancer CenterRan2009 to 2013Enrolled551ConditionsColorectal CancerArmsClinic-directed intervention program, Individual Patient-Directed Program
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Novel Application of Predictive Modeling: A Tailored Approach to Promoting HCC Surveillance in Patients With Cirrhosis.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2022
    Trial
  2. Assessing Colorectal Cancer Screening Barriers by Two Methods.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2018
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Results of a Multilevel Intervention Trial to Increase Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine Uptake among Adolescent Girls.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2016
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jessica L Krok-SchoenComprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, 1590 N. High St., Suite 525, Columbus, Ohio, 43201 USA.
Gregory S YoungCenter for Biostatistics, The Ohio State University, 2012 Kenny Rd., Columbus, OH 43221, USA.
Michael L PennellDivision of Biostatistics, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, 1841 Neil Ave., Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Paul L ReiterComprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, 1590 N. High St., Suite 525, Columbus, Ohio, 43201 USA ; Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, 395 W. 12 Ave., Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Mira L KatzComprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, 1590 N. High St., Suite 525, Columbus, Ohio, 43201 USA ; Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, 395 W. 12 Ave., Columbus, OH 43210, USA ; Division of Health Behavior and Health Promotion, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, 1841 Neil Ave., Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Douglas M PostComprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, 1590 N. High St., Suite 525, Columbus, Ohio, 43201 USA ; Department of Family Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, 2231 N. High St., Columbus, OH 43201, USA.
Cathy M TatumComprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, 1590 N. High St., Suite 525, Columbus, Ohio, 43201 USA.
Electra D PaskettComprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, 1590 N. High St., Suite 525, Columbus, Ohio, 43201 USA ; Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, 395 W. 12 Ave., Columbus, OH 43210, USA ; Division of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, 1841 Neil Ave., Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
The Ohio State University · US

Funding

Translational Therapeutics Research Program (TT)P30CA016058 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI Jennifer A. Woyach · 1985 to 2026
$132.3M
TRAINING AND CAREER DEVELOPMENTP50CA105632 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI PASKETT, ELECTRA D. · 2003 to 2016
$17.2M
Enhancing Colorectal Cancer Screening in Primary CareR01CA116487 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI PASKETT, ELECTRA D. · 2007 to 2011
$2.2M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016058NCI NIH HHS P50 CA105632NCI NIH HHS R01 CA116487
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo test the effectiveness of a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening intervention directed at three levels (clinic, provider, patient) in a primary care setting.

methodWe conducted a group randomized trial (Clinical Trials registration no. NCT01568151) among 10 primary care clinics in Columbus, Ohio that were randomized to a study condition (intervention or usual care). We determined the effect of a multi-level, stepped behavioral intervention on receipt of a CRC screening test among average-risk patients from these clinics over the study period.

resultsPatients (n=527) who were outside of CRC screening recommendations were recruited. Overall, 35.4% of participants in the intervention clinics had received CRC screening by the end of the study compared to 35.1% of participants who were in the usual care clinics. Time to CRC screening was also similar across arms (HR=0.97, 95% CI=0.65-1.45).

conclusionThe multi-level intervention was not effective in increasing CRC screening among participants who needed a test, perhaps due to low participation of patients in the stepped intervention. Future studies utilizing evidence-based strategies to encourage CRC screening are needed.

Indexed as

cancer preventioncancer screeningcolorectal cancerlay health advisormulti-level interventions

Identifiers

PMID26046014
PMCPMC4450442
OpenAlexW2016206332

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.