GuidelineJAMA2016
Screening for Colorectal Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.
Guideline in JAMA, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 5 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 942 papers, 4 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.
Colorectal Cancer Testing in Swiss Primary Care: A Pilot Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial in Quality Circles of Physicians
Effectiveness and Implementation of mPATH-CRC: a Mobile Health System for Colorectal Cancer Screening
Prospective, Non-randomized, Open-label and Multi-center Study With the Establishment of a Clinical-biological Database.
Scaling Colorectal Cancer Screening Through Outreach, Referral, and Engagement (SCORE): A State-Level Program to Reduce Colorectal Cancer Burden in Vulnerable Populations
Using a Cross-sectional Partnership to Improve Prevention and Health Equity Among African Americans
Who cites it
942 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Primary care practice-based interventions and their effect on participation in population-based cancer screening programs: a systematic narrative review.Primary health care research & development · 2024Pooled it
- LncRNA MALAT1 as diagnostic and prognostic biomarker in colorectal cancers: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Comparative analysis of SDC2 and SEPT9 methylation tests in the early detection of colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Comparison of short-term surgical outcomes and long-term survival between emergency and elective surgery for colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023Pooled it
- Stool-based methylated syndecan-2 test and fecal immunochemical test for advanced colorectal neoplasia screening in the Chinese population: A multicenter randomized noncomparative study.Chinese medical journal · 2026Trial
- Impact of Milk Consumption the Day Before Colonoscopy on Bowel Preparation Quality: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Trial
- Implementing a successful patient navigation program for follow-up colonoscopy: Lessons from the PRECISE study.PloS one · 2026Trial
- Centralized Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach in Federally Qualified Health Centers: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2024Trial
- A Randomized Trial of Choice Architecture and Mailed Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach in a Community Health Setting.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2024Trial
- Shared Decision-Making in Colorectal Cancer Screening for Older Adults: A Secondary Analysis of a Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2024Trial
- Bundling Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach with Screening for Social Risk in Federally Qualified Health Centers: A Stepped-Wedge Implementation-Effectiveness Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2024Trial
- Randomized Trial of Facilitated Adherence to Screening Colonoscopy vs Sequential Fecal-Based Blood Test.Gastroenterology · 2023Trial
- Comparative Effectiveness of 2 Interventions to Increase Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Women in the Rural US: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2023Trial
- Human Papillomavirus vaccination clinical decision support for young adults in an upper midwestern healthcare system: a clinic cluster-randomized control trial.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Trial
- The Influence of Asian Subgroup and Acculturation on Colorectal Cancer Screening Knowledge and Attitudes Among Chinese and Korean Americans.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2022Trial
- Process Evaluation of a Mailed Interactive Educational DVD in a Comparative Effectiveness Trial to Promote Colorectal Cancer Screening.Health promotion practice · 2022Trial
- Predictors of perceived value of multi-cancer early detection testing: a national PRECEDE-PROCEED framework study.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2026Article
- Article
- Large-scale and high-resolution mass spectrometry-based proteomics defines molecular subtypes of nasopharyngeal carcinoma for therapeutic targeting.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Article
- Longitudinal Adherence With Stool-Based Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Four United States Health Systems.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2026Article
882 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
- Erratum issued
- SummaryForPatientsIn
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
importanceColorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. In 2016, an estimated 134,000 persons will be diagnosed with the disease, and about 49,000 will die from it. Colorectal cancer is most frequently diagnosed among adults aged 65 to 74 years; the median age at death from colorectal cancer is 68 years.
objectiveTo update the 2008 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for colorectal cancer. EVIDENCE REVIEW: The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the effectiveness of screening with colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, computed tomography colonography, the guaiac-based fecal occult blood test, the fecal immunochemical test, the multitargeted stool DNA test, and the methylated SEPT9 DNA test in reducing the incidence of and mortality from colorectal cancer or all-cause mortality; the harms of these screening tests; and the test performance characteristics of these tests for detecting adenomatous polyps, advanced adenomas based on size, or both, as well as colorectal cancer. The USPSTF also commissioned a comparative modeling study to provide information on optimal starting and stopping ages and screening intervals across the different available screening methods.
findingsThe USPSTF concludes with high certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in average-risk, asymptomatic adults aged 50 to 75 years is of substantial net benefit. Multiple screening strategies are available to choose from, with different levels of evidence to support their effectiveness, as well as unique advantages and limitations, although there are no empirical data to demonstrate that any of the reviewed strategies provide a greater net benefit. Screening for colorectal cancer is a substantially underused preventive health strategy in the United States. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer starting at age 50 years and continuing until age 75 years (A recommendation). The decision to screen for colorectal cancer in adults aged 76 to 85 years should be an individual one, taking into account the patient's overall health and prior screening history (C recommendation).
Indexed as
Identifiers
27304597What 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.