ArticleAmerican journal of preventive medicine2016
Colorectal Cancer Screening in Vulnerable Patients: Promoting Informed and Shared Decisions.
Article in American journal of preventive 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 NCT02054598 (The CHOICES/OPCIONES Project), which is not on this map. Cited by 26 papers, 5 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.
The CHOICES/OPCIONES Project: Improving Colon Cancer Screening for Diverse Populations
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Interventions for improving health literacy in migrants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Patient Decision Aids for Socially Disadvantaged Populations: Update from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS).Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2021Pooled it
- Addressing Health Literacy in Patient Decision Aids: An Update from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2021Pooled it
- Promoting shared decision-making in colorectal cancer screening in primary care: A cluster randomized controlled trial.PloS one · 2026Trial
- Dissemination of colorectal cancer information among Hispanic patients and their social network.BMC public health · 2024Trial
- A culturally and linguistically salient pilot intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening among Latinos receiving care in a Federally Qualified Health Center.Health education research · 2019Trial
- Effect of Combined Patient Decision Aid and Patient Navigation vs Usual Care for Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Vulnerable Patient Population: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA internal medicine · 2017Trial
- [Prevention and early detection of colorectal cancer].Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Colorectal Cancer Messaging and Gaps in Knowledge Among Screening-Eligible Individuals.Health promotion practice · 2026Article
- Characteristics of interventions aimed at reducing inequalities along the cancer continuum: A scoping review.International journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Using a digital health platform to implement a multi-component CRC screening intervention within a federally qualified health center: study protocol for a hybrid type I trial.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Residential Segregation and Colorectal Cancer Screening in the United States, 2010 to 2018.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025Article
- Implementation studio: implementation support program to build the capacity of rural community health educators serving immigrant communities to implement evidence-based cancer prevention and control interventions.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2023Article
- Implementation strategies in the Exploration and Preparation phases of a colorectal cancer screening intervention in community health centers.Implementation science communications · 2023Article
- Mixed-Method Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Shared Decision-Making Tools for Cancer Screening.Cancers · 2023Review
- Protocol for a two-arm pragmatic stepped-wedge hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial evaluating Engagement and Collaborative Management to Proactively Advance Sepsis Survivorship (ENCOMPASS).BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Testing a Culturally Adapted Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision Aid Among American Indians: Results from a Pre-Post Trial.Health equity · 2020Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, and worries among different health literacy groups before receiving first invitation to colorectal cancer screening: Cross-sectional study.Preventive medicine reports · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionLow-income, low-literacy, limited English-proficient populations have low colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates and experience poor patient-provider communication and decision-making processes around screening. The purpose of this study was to test the effect of a CRC screening decision aid on screening-related communication and decision making in primary care visits. STUDY
designRCT with data collected from patients at baseline and immediately after the provider encounter. SETTING/
participantsPatients aged 50-75 years, due for CRC screening, were recruited from two safety net clinics in North Carolina and New Mexico (data collection, January 2014-September 2015; analysis, 2015).
interventionParticipants viewed a CRC screening decision aid or a food safety (control) video immediately before their provider encounter.
main outcome measuresCRC screening-related knowledge, discussion, intent, test preferences, and test ordering.
resultsThe study population (N=262) had a mean age of 58.3 years and was 66% female, 61% Latino, 17% non-Latino black, and 16% non-Latino white. Among Latino participants, 71% preferred Spanish. Compared with controls, intervention participants had greater screening-related knowledge (on average 4.6 vs 2.8 of six knowledge items correct, adjusted difference [AD]=1.8, 95% CI=1.5, 2.1) and were more likely to report screening discussion (71.0% vs 45.0%, AD=26.1%, 95% CI=14.3%, 38.0%) and high screening intent (93.1% vs 84.7%, AD=9.0%, 95% CI=2.0%, 16.0%). Intervention participants were more likely to indicate a specific screening test preference (93.1% vs 68.0%, AD=26.5%, 95% CI=17.2%, 35.8%) and to report having a test ordered (56.5% vs 32.1%, AD=25.8%, 95% CI=14.4%, 37.2%).
conclusionsViewing a CRC screening decision aid before a primary care encounter improves knowledge and shared decision making around screening in a racially, ethnically, and linguistically diverse safety net clinic population.
trial registrationThis study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT02054598.
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.