ArticleEvaluation and program planning2017
Costs of colorectal cancer screening provision in CDC's Colorectal Cancer Control Program: Comparisons of colonoscopy and FOBT/FIT based screening.
Article in Evaluation and program planning, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Interventions to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake in Rural Settings: A Scoping Review.Preventing chronic disease · 2025Article
- Implementing Mailed Colorectal Cancer Fecal Screening Tests in Real-World Primary Care Settings: Promising Implementation Practices and Opportunities for Improvement.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2024Article
- Positive Fecal Occult Blood Test and Colonoscopy With Histopathology Findings in Saudi Adults.Cureus · 2023Article
- Integrated interventions and supporting activities to increase uptake of multiple cancer screenings: conceptual framework, determinants of implementation success, measurement challenges, and research priorities.Implementation science communications · 2022Article
- Yield of Post-Acute Diverticulitis Colonoscopy for Ruling Out Colorectal Cancer.Techniques and innovations in gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2022Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Genetic Testing.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Can Cost-effectiveness Analysis Inform Genotype-Guided Aspirin Use for Primary Colorectal Cancer Prevention?Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2021Article
- Cost and Effectiveness of Reminders to Promote Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake in Rural Federally Qualified Health Centers in West Virginia.Health promotion practice · 2020Article
- Preventing Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Deaths: Assessing the Impact of Increased Screening.Preventing chronic disease · 2020Article
- Article
- Managed Health Care and Utilization of Fecal Occult Blood Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening: a National Database Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2020Article
- Developing a Web-Based Cost Assessment Tool for Colorectal Cancer Screening Programs.Preventing chronic disease · 2019Article
- Comparison of Program Resources Required for Colonoscopy and Fecal Screening: Findings From 5 Years of the Colorectal Cancer Control Program.Preventing chronic disease · 2019Article
- Identifying optimal approaches to scale up colorectal cancer screening: an overview of the centers for disease control and prevention (CDC)'s learning laboratory.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2019Review
- Article
- Observational
- Increasing Colorectal Cancer Screening in Health Care Systems Using Evidence-Based Interventions.Preventing chronic disease · 2018Article
- Economic evaluation of patient navigation programs in colorectal cancer care, a systematic review.Health economics review · 2018Review
- Primary care visit use after positive fecal immunochemical test for colorectal cancer screening.Cancer · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We assess annual costs of screening provision activities implemented by 23 of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) grantees and report differences in costs between colonoscopy and FOBT/FIT-based screening programs. We analysed annual cost data for the first three years of the CRCCP (July 2009-June 2011) for each screening provision activity and categorized them into clinical and non-clinical screening provision activities. The largest cost components for both colonoscopy and FOBT/FIT-based programs were screening and diagnostic services, program management, and data collection and tracking. During the first 3 years of the CRCCP, the average annual clinical cost for screening and diagnostic services per person served was $1150 for colonoscopy programs, compared to $304 for FIT/FOBT-based programs. Overall, FOBT/FIT-based programs appear to have slightly higher non-clinical costs per person served (average $1018; median $838) than colonoscopy programs (average $980; median $686). Colonoscopy-based CRCCP programs have higher clinical costs than FOBT/FIT-based programs during the 3-year study timeframe (translating into fewer people screened). Non-clinical costs for both approaches are similar and substantial. Future studies of the cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening initiatives should consider both clinical and non-clinical costs.
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.