ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2017
Predictors of primary care provider adoption of CT colonography for colorectal cancer screening.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Colorectal cancer screening in adults aged 45-49: provider availability, CT colonography access, and screening rates.Journal of the National Cancer Center · 2025Article
- Insurance Coverage for CT Colonography Screening: Impact on Overall Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates.Radiology · 2017Article
- Multimodality Imaging Review of Anorectal and Perirectal Diseases With Histological, Endoscopic, and Operative Correlation, Part I: Anatomy and Neoplasms.Current problems in diagnostic radiologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo examine factors influencing primary care provider (PCP) adoption of CT colonography (CTC) for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study linking electronic health record (EHR) data with PCP survey data. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they were not up-to-date with CRC screening and if they had CTC insurance coverage in the year prior to survey administration. PCPs were included if they had at least one eligible patient in their panel and completed the survey (final sample N = 95 PCPs; N = 6245 patients). Survey data included perceptions of CRC screening by any method, as well as CTC specifically. Multivariate logistic regression estimated odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for PCP and clinic predictors of CRC screening by any method and screening with CTC.
resultsSubstantial variation in CTC use was seen among PCPs and clinics (range 0-16% of CRC screening). Predictors of higher CTC use were PCP perceptions that CTC is effective in reducing CRC mortality, higher number of perceived advantages to screening with CTC, and Internal Medicine specialty. Factors not associated with CTC use were PCP perceptions of less organizational capacity to meet demand for colonoscopy, number of perceived disadvantages to screening with CTC, PCP age and gender, and clinic factors.
conclusionSignificant variation in PCP adoption of CTC exists. PCP perceptions of CTC and specialty practice were related to CTC adoption. Strategies to increase PCP adoption of CTC for CRC screening should include emphasis on the effectiveness and advantages of CTC.
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.