ArticleJournal of health disparities research and practice2015
Factors Associated with Colorectal Cancer Screening among Younger African American Men: A Systematic Review.
Article in Journal of health disparities research and practice, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions for increasing colorectal cancer screening uptake among African-American men: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2020Pooled it
- Masculinity, Racism, Social Support, and Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake Among African American Men: A Systematic Review.American journal of men's health · 2017Pooled it
- Investigating predictive factors of participation in colorectal cancer screening based on the Preventive Health Model (PHM) and health literacy.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Colorectal Cancer Risk and Protective Factors Among People of African Descent: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cureus · 2025Review
- Effect of an Inflatable Colon on Colorectal Cancer Knowledge and Screening Intent Among Male Attendees at State Fairs in Two Midwestern States, 2023.Preventing chronic disease · 2024Article
- What factors influence the uptake of bowel, breast and cervical cancer screening? An overview of international research.European journal of public health · 2024Review
- Perceived economic pressure and colorectal cancer-related perceptions among U.S. males (aged 45-75).Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2023Article
- Female Colon Cancer Metastasis Pattern and Prognosis: A SEER-Based Study.BioMed research international · 2022Article
- Race and Gender Differences in Awareness of Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests and Guidelines Among Recently Diagnosed Colon Cancer Patients in an Urban Setting.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021Article
- Factors associated with colorectal cancer screening intent and uptake among adult Non-Hispanic Black men.American journal of cancer research · 2021Article
- Integrating intra-individual and dyadic factors in examining health among gay and bisexual men: A narrative review of recent literature.Journal of GLBT family studies · 2020Article
- Article
- The Effect of Educational Intervention Based on Health Belief Model and Social Support on the Rate of Participation of Individuals in Performing Fecal Occult Blood Test for Colorectal Cancer ScreeningAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2018Article
- Knowledge of Colorectal Cancer Symptoms and Risk Factors in the Kingdom of Bahrain: a Cross- Sectional StudyAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2018Article
- Predictors of Cancer Screening Among Culturally Diverse Men.American journal of men's health · 2018Article
- Predictors of Intention to Obtain Colorectal Cancer Screening Among African American Men in a State Fair Setting.American journal of men's health · 2018Article
- Investigating Factors Associated with FOBT Screening for Colorectal Cancer Based on the Components of Health Belief Model and Social SupportAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2017Article
- Economic Pressure and Intention to Complete Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Cross-Sectional Analysis Among U.S. Men.American journal of men's healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Of cancers affecting both men and women, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cancer killer among African Americans in the U.S. Compared to White men, African American men have incidence and mortality rates 25% and 50% higher from CRC. Despite the benefits of early detection and the availability of effective screening, most adults over age 50 have not undergone testing, and disparities in colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) persist. Owing to CRC's high incidence and younger age at presentation among African American men, CRCS is warranted at age 45 rather than 50. However, the factors influencing young adult (i.e., age < 50) African American men's intention to screen and/or their CRCS behaviors has not been systematically assessed. To assess whether the factors influencing young adult African American men's screening intentions and behaviors are changeable through structured health education interventions, we conducted a systematic review, with the two-fold purpose of: (1) synthesizing studies examining African American men's knowledge, beliefs, and behaviors regarding CRCS; and (2) assessing these studies' methodological quality. Utilizing Garrard's Matrix Method, a total of 28 manuscripts met our inclusion/exclusion criteria: 20 studies followed a non-experimental research design, 4 comprised a quasi-experimental design, and 4, an experimental design. Studies were published between 2002 and 2012; the majority, between 2007 and 2011. The factors most frequently assessed were behaviors (79%), beliefs (68%), and knowledge (61%) of CRC and CRCS. Six factors associated with CRC and CRCS emerged: previous CRCS, CRC test preference, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, CRC/CRCS knowledge, and physician support/recommendation. Studies were assigned a methodological quality score (MQS - ranging from 0 to 21). The mean MQS of 10.9 indicated these studies were, overall, of medium quality and suffered from specific flaws. Alongside a call for more rigorous research, this review provides important suggestions for practice and culturally relevant interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26435888PMC4590998W2116778870What 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.