ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2016
Variation in Screening Abnormality Rates and Follow-Up of Breast, Cervical and Colorectal Cancer Screening within the PROSPR Consortium.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06305312 (Community Services Navigation to Advance Health Equity in Breast Cancer Screening), which is not on this map. Cited by 34 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.
Community Services Navigation to Advance Health Equity in Breast Cancer Screening
Who cites it
34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Test performance metrics for breast, cervical, colon, and lung cancer screening: a systematic review.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2023Pooled it
- Patient Perceptions on the Follow-Up of Abnormal Cancer Screening Test Results.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Primary Care Practitioner Perceptions on the Follow-up of Abnormal Cancer Screening Test Results.JAMA network open · 2022Trial
- Supporting breast and cervical cancer screening follow-up: qualitative health plan interviews.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Gaps in care across the cancer screening continuum for cervical, colorectal, and lung cancers.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2025Article
- Multicancer early detection testing: Guidance for primary care discussions with patients.Cancer · 2025Review
- Article
- Delivering Guideline-Concordant Care for Patients With High-Risk HPV and Normal Cytologic Findings.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Patient and tumour characteristics of screening-age adults diagnosed with screen-detected versus symptomatic colon cancer.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2022Article
- Factors associated with timely colposcopy following an abnormal cervical cancer test result.Preventive medicine · 2022Article
- Evaluating and Improving Cancer Screening Process Quality in a Multilevel Context: The PROSPR II Consortium Design and Research Agenda.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2022Article
- Natural Language Processing to Identify Abnormal Breast, Lung, and Cervical Cancer Screening Test Results from Unstructured Reports to Support Timely Follow-up.Studies in health technology and informatics · 2022Article
- The impact of cumulative colorectal cancer screening delays: A simulation study.Journal of medical screening · 2022Article
- Adherence to follow-up after the exit cervical cancer screening test at age 60-64: A nationwide register-based study.Cancer medicine · 2022Article
- Multilevel Follow-up of Cancer Screening (mFOCUS): Protocol for a multilevel intervention to improve the follow-up of abnormal cancer screening test results.Contemporary clinical trials · 2021Article
- Implementing a multilevel intervention to accelerate colorectal cancer screening and follow-up in federally qualified health centers using a stepped wedge design: a study protocol.Implementation science : IS · 2020Article
- Evaluating Screening Participation, Follow-up, and Outcomes for Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer in the PROSPR Consortium.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2020Article
- Variation in Colorectal Cancer Stage and Mortality across Large Community-Based Populations: PORTAL Colorectal Cancer Cohort.The Permanente journal · 2020Article
- Time to Follow-up After Colorectal Cancer Screening by Health Insurance Type.American journal of preventive medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
20 authors at 15 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrimary care providers and health systems have prominent roles in guiding effective cancer screening.
objectiveTo characterize variation in screening abnormality rates and timely initial follow-up for common cancer screening tests.
designPopulation-based cohort undergoing screening in 2011, 2012, or 2013 at seven research centers comprising the National Cancer Institute-sponsored Population-based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens (PROSPR) consortium.
participantsAdults undergoing mammography with or without digital breast tomosynthesis (n = 97,683 ages 40-75 years), fecal occult blood or fecal immunochemical tests (n = 759,553 ages 50-75 years), or Papanicolaou with or without human papillomavirus tests (n = 167,330 ages 21-65 years).
interventionBreast, colorectal, or cervical cancer screening. MAIN MEASURES: Abnormality rates per 1000 screens; percentage with timely initial follow-up (within 90 days, except 9-month window for BI-RADS 3). Primary care clinic-level variation in percentage with screening abnormality and percentage with timely initial follow-up. KEY
resultsThere were 10,248/97,683 (104.9 per 1000) abnormal breast cancer screens, 35,847/759,553 (47.2 per 1000) FOBT/FIT-positive colorectal cancer screens, and 13,266/167,330 (79.3 per 1000) abnormal cervical cancer screens. The percentage with timely follow-up was 93.2 to 96.7 % for breast centers, 46.8 to 68.7 % for colorectal centers, and 46.6 % for the cervical cancer screening center (low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or higher). The primary care clinic variation (25th to 75th percentile) was smaller for the percentage with an abnormal screen (breast, 8.5-10.3 %; colorectal, 3.0-4.8 %; cervical, 6.3-9.9 %) than for the percentage with follow-up within 90 days (breast, 90.2-95.8 %; colorectal, 43.4-52.0 %; cervical, 29.6-61.4 %).
conclusionsVariation in both the rate of screening abnormalities and their initial follow-up was evident across organ sites and primary care clinics. This highlights an opportunity for improving the delivery of cancer screening through focused study of patient, provider, clinic, and health system characteristics associated with timely follow-up of screening abnormalities.
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.