Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27625308›Full record

Trial reportAustralian and New Zealand journal of public health2016

Can a print-based intervention increase screening for first degree relatives of people with colorectal cancer? A randomised controlled trial.

Mariko Carey, Robert Sanson-Fisher, Finlay Macrae, Emilie Cameron, David Hill, Catherine D'Este, Jody Simmons, Christopher Doran

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Australian and New Zealand journal of public health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Mariko CareyPriority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, New South Wales.
Robert Sanson-FisherPriority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, New South Wales.
Finlay MacraeUniversity of Melbourne, Victoria.
Emilie CameronPriority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, New South Wales.
David HillUniversity of Melbourne, Victoria.
Catherine D'EsteNational Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Research School of Population Health, Australian National University, Australian Capital Territory.
Jody SimmonsCancer Council Victoria.
Christopher DoranSchool of Human, Health and Social Sciences, Central Queensland University.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo test the effectiveness of a targeted print-based intervention to improve screening adherence in first degree relatives of people with colorectal cancer (CRC).

methodsPeople with CRC and their adult first degree relatives were identified through a population-based cancer registry and randomly allocated as a family unit to the intervention or control condition. The control group received general information about CRC screening. The intervention group received printed advice regarding screening that was targeted to their risk level. Screening adherence was assessed at baseline and at 12 months via self report.

results752 (25%) index cases and 574 (34%) eligible first degree relatives consented to take part in the trial and completed baseline interviews. At 12 months, 58% of first degree relatives in the control group and 61% in the intervention group were adherent to screening guidelines (mixed effects logistic regression group by time interaction effect =2.7; 95%CI=1.2-5.9; P=0.013). Subgroup analysis indicated that the intervention was only effective for those with the lowest risk.

conclusionsProvision of personalised risk information may have a modest effect on adherence to CRC screening recommendations among first degree relatives of people diagnosed with CRC. IMPLICATIONS: Improved strategies for identifying and engaging first degree relatives are needed to maximise the population impact of the intervention.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerTeaching MaterialsAdultAgedColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health Carebowel cancercolorectal cancerfamilial riskFecal Occult Blood Testpopulation screeningtargeted advice

Identifiers

PMID27625308
PMCPMC5157779

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.