ArticleBMC public health2015
Factors associated with use and non-use of the Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) kit for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Response to a 2012 outreach screening program: a survey study.
Article in BMC public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review of Repeat Fecal Occult Blood Tests for Colorectal Cancer Screening.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2020Pooled it
- Video brochures in a mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach program provide cancer screening information in a user-friendly format for rural Appalachian community members.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2024Trial
- The effect of deadlines on cancer screening completion: a randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2021Trial
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Blood-Based cfDNA/ctDNA Tests for Colorectal Cancer-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cancers · 2026Review
- Current Progress in Clinical Research in Secondary Prevention and Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer.Cancers · 2025Review
- Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening With a Blood Test That Meets the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Coverage Decision.Gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Article
- Patient perspectives on a proposed pharmacy-based colorectal cancer screening program.Translational behavioral medicine · 2023Article
- Inequality in uptake of bowel cancer screening by deprivation, ethnicity and smoking status: cross-sectional study in 86 850 citizens.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- Using Text Messages and Fotonovelas to Increase Return of Home-Mailed Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests: Mixed Methods Evaluation.JMIR cancer · 2023Article
- Epidemiology and zoonotic transmission ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Experience and Attitude of Colorectal Screening Pilot Program Participants Regarding Screening and Screening Programs in Hungary.Iranian journal of public health · 2022Article
- Article
- A hands-free stool sampling system for monitoring intestinal health and disease.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Persistent Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening Completion Amid Centralized Outreach: A Mixed Methods Study.American journal of health promotion : AJHP · 2022Article
- Program Components and Results From an Organized Colorectal Cancer Screening Program Using Annual Fecal Immunochemical Testing.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2022Article
- A qualitative study of patient preferences for prompts and reminders for a direct-mail fecal testing program.Translational behavioral medicine · 2021Article
- Factors Associated With Colorectal Cancer Screening Via Immunochemical Fecal Occult Blood Test in an Average-Risk Population From a Multiethnic, Middle-Income Setting.JCO global oncology · 2021Article
- On-chip stool liquefaction via acoustofluidics.Lab on a chip · 2019Article
- Colorectal cancer screening: Understanding the health literacy needs of hispanic rural residents.AIMS public health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe one-sample fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is gaining popularity for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening of average-risk people. However, uptake and annual use remain suboptimal.
methodsIn 2013, we mailed questionnaires to three groups of nonHispanic White, Black, and Latino Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) members ages 52-76 who received FIT kits in 2010-2012: Continuers did the FIT all 3 years; Converts in 2012, but not 2010 or 2011; and Nonusers in none of the 3 years. The questionnaires covered social influences, perceived CRC risk, reasons for using (Continuers, Converts) or avoiding using (Nonusers) the FIT, and recommendations for improving the kit.
resultsContinuers (n = 607, response rate 67.5%), Converts (n = 317, response rate 35.6%), and Nonusers (n = 215, response rate 21.1%) did not differ in perceived risk or family history of CRC, but Nonusers were less likely than Continuers and Converts to know someone who had polyps or CRC. Continuers, Converts, and Nonusers did not differ in social network encouragement of CRC screening, but did differ in believing that it was very important that they be screened (88.3%, 68.4%, 47.7%) and that their medical team thought it very important that they be screened (88.6%, 79.9%, 53.9%). Approximately half of Continuers and Converts completed the FIT to please their doctor. Converts were less likely than Continuers to use the FIT to "make sure they were OK" (53.7% vs. 72.6%) or "protect their health" (46.1% vs. 76.4%). Nearly half of Converts completed the FIT out of guilt. Approximately half of FIT kit users suggested adding a disposable glove, extra paper, and wider-mouth tube to the kit. Nonusers' reasons for not using the FIT included discomfort, disgust, or embarrassment (59.6%); thinking it unnecessary (32.9%); fatalism/fear (15.5%); and thinking it too difficult to use (14.5%), but <10% did not want CRC screening at all.
conclusionsNonusers and irregular users of the FIT are less intrinsically motivated to get CRC screening than long-term users and more averse to preparing their stool sample. Changes to the FIT kit to address discomfort and difficulty factors might improve uptake and continued use.
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.