ReviewTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2015
Choosing the optimal method in programmatic colorectal cancer screening: current evidence and controversies.
Review in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The clinical role of microRNA-21 as a promising biomarker in the diagnosis and prognosis of colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Oncotarget · 2017Pooled it
- Pooled it
- A new modality of colorectal cancer screening based on chronic disease management.BMC gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Bile cholesterol and viscosity, the keys to discriminating adenomatous polyps from cholesterol polyps by a novel predictive scoring model.BMC gastroenterology · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is an important health problem all over the world, being the third most common cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related death in Western countries. The most important strategy for CRC prevention is screening (i.e. secondary prevention). Since it is widely accepted that adenomas and serrated polyps are the precursors of the vast majority of CRC, early detection and removal of these lesions is associated with a reduction of CRC incidence and, consequently, mortality. Moreover, cancers detected by screening are usually diagnosed at early stages and, therefore, curable by endoscopic or surgical procedures. This review will be address CRC screening strategies in average-risk population, which is defined by those individuals, men and women, 50 years of age or older, without any additional personal or familial predisposing risk factor. In order to maximize the impact of screening and ensure high coverage and equity of access, only organized screening programs (i.e. programmatic screening) should be implemented, as opposed to case-finding or opportunistic screening. For that reason and considering that the optimal approach for colorectal screening may differ depending on the scenario, this review will be focused on the advantages and limitations of each screening strategy in an organized setting.
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.