ReviewGut2015
The value of models in informing resource allocation in colorectal cancer screening: the case of The Netherlands.
Review in Gut, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 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
41 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Simulation modeling validity and utility in colorectal cancer screening delivery: A systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020Pooled it
- Guideline
- Modeling in Colorectal Cancer Screening: Assessing External and Predictive Validity of MISCAN-Colon Microsimulation Model Using NORCCAP Trial Results.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2018Trial
- The validation of electronic health records in accurately identifying patients eligible for colorectal cancer screening in safety net clinics.Family practice · 2016Trial
- AI-Enhanced Prognostic Model for Predicting Polyp Recurrence and Guiding Post-Polypectomy Surveillance Intervals Using the ERCPMP-V5 Dataset.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Developing and Calibrating a Colorectal Cancer Microsimulation Model for Northern Ireland.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Article
- Risk-based guidance for choosing fecal immunochemical test or colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: a modeling study.American journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of colon capsule endoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: a modeling study.Endoscopy · 2025Article
- An Adjustable Positivity Threshold for Non-invasive Screening Tests for Colorectal Neoplasms Can Improve Screening Program Effectiveness and Feasibility.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Review
- Population-level impact of the BMJ Rapid Recommendation for colorectal cancer screening: a microsimulation analysis.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the "Burgenland PREvention trial of colorectal cancer Disease with ImmunologiCal Testing" (B-PREDICT)-a population-based colorectal cancer screening program.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Potential global loss of life expected due to COVID-19 disruptions to organised colorectal cancer screening.EClinicalMedicine · 2023Article
- Personalized colorectal cancer screening: study protocol of a mixed-methods study on the effectiveness of tailored intervals based on prior f-Hb concentration in a fit-based colorectal cancer screening program (PERFECT-FIT).BMC gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of colorectal cancer screening in Shanghai, China: A modelling study.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Article
- Risk-stratified strategies in population screening for colorectal cancer.International journal of cancer · 2022Review
- Article
- Microsimulation Model for Prevention and Intervention of Coloretal Cancer in China (MIMIC-CRC): Development, Calibration, Validation, and Application.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Comparative benefit and cost-effectiveness of mailed-out faecal immunochemical tests vs collection at the general practitioner.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2021Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on faecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening programmes in Australia, Canada, and the Netherlands: a comparative modelling study.The lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In May 2011, the Dutch government decided to implement a national programme for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening using biennial faecal immunochemical test screening between ages 55 and 75. Decision modelling played an important role in informing this decision, as well as in the planning and implementation of the programme afterwards. In this overview, we illustrate the value of models in informing resource allocation in CRC screening using the role that decision modelling has played in the Dutch CRC screening programme as an example.
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.