SynthesisAnnals of family medicine2015
Cancer risk assessment tools in primary care: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Annals of family medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cancer diagnostic tools to aid decision-making in primary care: mixed-methods systematic reviews and cost-effectiveness analysis.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Exploring a novel method for optimising the implementation of a colorectal cancer risk prediction tool into primary care: a qualitative study.Implementation science : IS · 2022Trial
- Colorectal cancer lifetime risk accuracy and behavior change intentions before and after risk assessment.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2021Trial
- Patient and Physician Perspectives on Using Risk Prediction to Support Breast Cancer Surveillance Decision Making.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026Article
- Inherited Susceptibility to Cancer: Past, Present and Future.Annals of human genetics · 2025Review
- "I Thought Cancer was a Tobacco Issue": Perspectives of Veterans with and without HIV on Cancer and Other Health Risks Associated with Alcohol and Tobacco/Nicotine Use.AIDS and behavior · 2024Article
- Implementation of risk assessment process for breast cancer risk in primary care.Journal of cancer prevention & current research · 2024Article
- Colorectal Cancer Risk Assessment and Precision Approaches to Screening: Brave New World or Worlds Apart?Gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Perceptions of Breast Cancer Risks Among Women Receiving Mammograph Screening.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- The co-development of personalised 10-year breast cancer risk communications: a 'think-aloud' study.BMC cancer · 2022Article
- A Clinical Decision Support System for Assessing the Risk of Cervical Cancer: Development and Evaluation Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2022Article
- Report from an NCI Roundtable: Cancer Prevention in Primary Care.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2022Article
- Patient and practitioner views on cancer risk discussions in primary care: a qualitative study.BJGP open · 2022Article
- Roles of Community Pharmacists in Cancer Management.Innovations in pharmacy · 2022Article
- Barriers and facilitators to implementing a cancer risk assessment tool (QCancer) in primary care: a qualitative study.Primary health care research & development · 2021Article
- The classification capability of the Asia Pacific Colorectal Screening score in Korea: an analysis of the Cancer Screenee Cohort.Epidemiology and health · 2021Article
- A risk-stratified approach to colorectal cancer prevention and diagnosis.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2020Review
- Effectiveness of interventions to identify and manage patients with familial cancer risk in primary care: a systematic review.Journal of community genetics · 2020Article
- Incorporating Colorectal Cancer Genetic Risk Assessment into Gastroenterology Practice.Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe conducted this review to identify published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of cancer risk assessment tools used in primary care and to determine their impact on clinical utility (clinicians), screening uptake (patients), and psychosocial outcomes (patients).
methodsWe searched EMBASE, PubMed and the Cochrane databases for RCTs of cancer risk assessment tools in primary care up to May 2014. Only studies set in primary care, with patients eligible for screening, and English-language articles were included.
resultsThe review included 11 trials of 7 risk tools. The trials were heterogeneous with respect to type of tool that was used, type(s) of cancer assessed, and outcomes measured. Evidence suggested risk tools improved patient risk perception, knowledge, and screening intentions, but not necessarily screening behavior. Overall, uptake of a tool was greater if initiated by patients, if used by a dedicated clinician, and when combined with decision support. There was no increase in cancer worry. Health promotion messages within the tool had positive effects on behavior change. Trials were limited by low-recruitment uptake, and the heterogeneity of the findings necessitated a narrative review rather than a meta-analysis.
conclusionsRisk tools may increase intentions to have cancer screening, but additional interventions at the clinician or health system levels may be needed to increase risk-appropriate cancer screening behavior.
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.