Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28266301›Full record

Trial reportDeutsches Arzteblatt international2017

Screening for Bowel Cancer: Increasing Participation via Personal Invitation.

Michael Hoffmeister, Bernd Holleczek, Nadine Zwink, Christian Stock, Christa Stegmaier, Hermann Brenner

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. In Reply.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2017
    Article
  13. Preventing Bowel Cancer Through Hormones.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2017
    Article
  14. Missing Information.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2017
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Michael HoffmeisterDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg; Cancer Registry Saarland, Saarbrücken; Institute for Medical Biometrics and Information Science, University of Heidelberg; Department of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg.
Bernd Holleczek
Nadine Zwink
Christian Stock
Christa Stegmaier
Hermann Brenner

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundParticipation rates in bowel cancer screening programs in Germany continue to be low. In a model project, a logistically simple procedure for inviting patients to participate was tested as a means of increasing participation.

methodsA randomized trial was performed involving persons residing in the German federal state of Saarland who had either their 50th or their 55th birthday in the year beginning on 1 April 2012 (18 560 and 16 824 persons, respectively). The 50-year-olds received a written invitation to undergo a test for blood in the stool, either with or without a stool test attached, or else no invitation at all. The 55-year-olds received either an invitation to undergo colonoscopy or no invitation. Participation rates within one year were determined from billing data of the Saarland Association of Statutory Health. Insurance Physicians. The trial was registered in the German Registry of Clinical Trials, no. DRKS00006098.

resultsA written invitation to undergo testing of the stool for blood, together with an accompanying test, increased the participation rate within one year by 62% (from 15% to 25%, p <0.001, especially among men (+158% vs. +39% for women). The participation rate was higher in general among women than among men (33% vs. 17%). On the other hand, a written invitation with no accompanying test did not increase the participation rate. A written invitation to undergo colonoscopic screening increased the participation rate within one year by 32% (5.9% vs 4.4%, p <0.001).

conclusionTargeted invitations can markedly increase participation rates in cancer screening. Written invitations to undergo stool testing for blood should be accompanied by an actual test. Further trials should also include information about the number of adenomas and carcinomas detected by screening.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerPatient ParticipationColonoscopyColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPostal Service

Identifiers

PMID28266301
PMCPMC5341111

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.