Trial reportBritish journal of cancer2016
Do no harm: no psychological harm from colorectal cancer screening.
Trial report in British journal of cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Colorectal cancer screening with faecal testing, sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2019Pooled it
- Anxiety Associated with Colonoscopy and Flexible Sigmoidoscopy: A Systematic Review.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2018Pooled it
- Hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance may be associated with potential psychological harms in patients with cirrhosis.Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.) · 2024Trial
- Psychological effects of colorectal cancer screening: ParticipantsWorld journal of gastroenterology · 2016Trial
- Short-term impact of cardiovascular screening by traditional risk assessment or coronary artery calcium score on health-related quality of life: the ROBINSCA trial.European heart journal open · 2024Article
- Health utility assessments in individuals undergoing diagnostic and surveillance colonoscopy: improved discrimination with a cancer-specific scale.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2024Article
- Summary of the experiences, knowledge, medical management, and family communication of monoallelic MUTYH carriers.Journal of genetic counseling · 2023Article
- Methodological Quality of PROMs in Psychosocial Consequences of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.Patient related outcome measures · 2023Review
- Review
- The clinical utility of a comprehensive psychosomatic assessment in the program for colorectal cancer prevention: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Psychological distress and quality of life following positive fecal occult blood testing in colorectal cancer screening.Psycho-oncology · 2020Article
- Long-term positive psychological outcomes in an Australian pancreatic cancer screening program.Familial cancer · 2020Article
- Research ethics oversight in Norway: structure, function, and challenges.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Programmed colorectal cancer screening decreases incidence and mortality.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2019Article
- Psychosocial consequences of skin cancer screening.Preventive medicine reports · 2018Article
- Waiting for diagnostic colonoscopy: a qualitative exploration of screening participants' experiences in a FIT-based colorectal cancer screening program.Patient preference and adherence · 2018Article
- Comparison of the efficiency of colorectal cancer screening programs based on age and genetic risk for reduction of colorectal cancer mortality.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2017Article
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 at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundParticipation in cancer screening programmes might cause worries in the population outweighting the benefits of reduced mortality. The present study aimed to investigate possible psychological harm of participation in a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening pilot in Norway.
methodsIn a prospective, randomised trial participants (aged 50-74 years) were invited to either flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening, faecal immunochemical test (FIT), or no screening (the control group; 1 : 1: 1). Three thousand two hundred and thirteen screening participants (42% of screened individuals) completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale questionnaire as well as the SF-12-a health-related quality of life (HRQOL) questionnaire when invited to screening and when receiving the screening result. A control group was invited to complete the questionnaires only. Two thousand six hundred and eighteen control participants (35% of invited individuals) completed the questionnaire.
resultsA positive screening result did not increase participants' level of anxiety or depression, or decrease participants' level of HRQOL. Participants who received a negative result reported decreased anxiety and improvement on some HRQOL dimensions. However, no change was considered to be of clinical relevance.
conclusionThe current study showed no clinically relevant psychological harm of receiving a positive CRC screening result or of participating in FS or FIT screening, in a Norwegian population.
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.