ArticleBMJ open2016
Training primary care physicians to offer their patients faecal occult blood testing and colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening on an equal basis: a pilot intervention with before-after and parallel group surveys.
Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 16 papers.
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.
Colorectal Cancer Testing in Swiss Primary Care: A Pilot Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial in Quality Circles of Physicians
Colorectal Cancer Testing in Swiss Primary Care: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial Among Primary Care Physicians of the Swiss Sentinel Surveillance Network
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Promoting shared decision-making in colorectal cancer screening in primary care: A cluster randomized controlled trial.PloS one · 2026Trial
- Strengthening colonoscopy screening in primary care: A preventive imperative before the coming surge.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2026Article
- Equitable colorectal cancer screening implementation framework via a modified Delphi Consensus for Romanian healthcare.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Monthly Variations in Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests Among Federally Qualified Health Center Patients in Missouri: Quality Improvement Project.JMIR cancer · 2025Article
- Organized Colorectal Cancer Screening Programs in Switzerland - Quo Vadis?International journal of public health · 2025Article
- Screening, awareness and challenges for colorectal cancer treatment in Saudi Arabia: an update.Bioinformation · 2024Article
- Synthesis of Existent Oncology Curricula for Primary Care Providers: A Scoping Review With a Global Equity Lens.JCO global oncology · 2023Article
- Screening Status as a Determinant of Choice of Colorectal Cancer Screening Method: A Population-Based Informed Survey.Gastrointestinal tumors · 2021Article
- Primary Care Provider Beliefs and Recommendations About Colorectal Cancer Screening in Four Healthcare Systems.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2020Article
- Physician-office vs home uptake of colorectal cancer screening using FOBT/FIT among screening-eligible US adults.Cancer medicine · 2019Article
- Variation in colorectal cancer testing between primary care physicians: a cross-sectional study in Switzerland.International journal of public health · 2019Article
- Screening Refusal Associated with Choice of Colorectal Cancer Screening Methods. A Cross-sectional Study Among Swiss Primary Care Physicians.Journal of general internal medicine · 2019Article
- Offering patients a choice for colorectal cancer screening: a quality improvement pilot study in a quality circle of primary care physicians.BMJ open quality · 2019Article
- A provider feedback intervention to increase uptake of colorectal cancer screening in a Swiss academic general practice.BMJ open quality · 2019Article
- Screening for colorectal cancer: the role of the primary care physician.European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology · 2017Review
- Personalized cancer screening: helping primary care rise to the challenge.Public health reviewsArticle
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesPrimary care physicians (PCPs) should prescribe faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) or colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening based on their patient's values and preferences. However, there are wide variations between PCPs in the screening method prescribed. The objective was to assess the impact of an educational intervention on PCPs' intent to offer FIT or colonoscopy on an equal basis.
designSurvey before and after training seminars, with a parallel comparison through a mailed survey to PCPs not attending the training seminars.
settingAll PCPs in the canton of Vaud, Switzerland.
participantsOf 592 eligible PCPs, 133 (22%) attended a seminar and 106 (80%) filled both surveys. 109 (24%) PCPs who did not attend the seminars returned the mailed survey.
interventionA 2 h-long interactive seminar targeting PCP knowledge, skills and attitudes regarding offering a choice of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening options. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was PCP intention of having their patients screened with FIT and colonoscopy in equal proportions (between 40% and 60% each). Secondary outcomes were the perceived role of PCPs in screening decisions (from paternalistic to informed decision-making) and correct answer to a clinical vignette.
resultsBefore the seminars, 8% of PCPs reported that they had equal proportions of their patients screened for CRC by FIT and colonoscopy; after the seminar, 33% foresaw having their patients screened in equal proportions (p<0.001). Among those not attending, there was no change (13% vs 14%, p=0.8). Of those attending, there was no change in their perceived role in screening decisions, while the proportion responding correctly to a clinical vignette increased (88-99%, p<0.001).
conclusionsAn interactive training seminar increased the proportion of physicians with the intention to prescribe FIT and colonoscopy in equal proportions.
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.