ArticleAnnals of gastroenterology2017
Predictors of colorectal cancer screening awareness among people working in a hospital environment.
Article in Annals of gastroenterology, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening of healthcare staff for the prevention of colon cancer.Przeglad gastroenterologiczny · 2025Review
- Alarming endoscopic data in young and older asymptomatic people: Results of an open access, unlimited age colonoscopic screening for colorectal cancer.Molecular and clinical oncology · 2020Article
- Viewpoints of the target population regarding barriers and facilitators of colorectal cancer screening in the Czech Republic.World journal of gastroenterology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCompliance rates for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening are much lower than those desired. Appropriate information on CRC risks and screening methods is supposed to stimulate motivation for screening. We aimed to identify parameters associated with the decision for CRC screening and colonoscopy in a population expected to have high awareness of disease prevention.
methodsIn a single-center, cross-sectional study, we used an anonymous questionnaire (AQ) to record the demographics, habits and screening behavior for cancers and other common diseases of all employees older than 50 years in our hospital.
resultsAmong 287 active employees, 83% (n=237) answered the AQ (age 55±4 years). Thirty percent (n=70) underwent colonoscopy while 17% (n=40) underwent CRC screening (39/40) colonoscopy). Comparatively, among women 97% had a Pap-smear, 92% a mammography, while among men 83% had been tested for serum prostate-specific antigen. Age, male sex, alcohol consumption and university education correlated positively with CRC screening (P<0.05 for all). After multivariate analysis, university education remained an independent determinant of CRC screening (OR 2.488, 95%CI 1.096-5.648; P=0.029). Among subjects who had not undergone colonoscopy in the past, ignorance of the need for CRC screening (OR 0.360, 95%CI 0.150-0.867; P=0.023) and indifference to undergo such a procedure (OR 0.188, 95%CI 0.066-0.537; P=0.002) were independent determinants for not planning a future screening colonoscopy.
conclusionsEducation was the most important factor in the decision to undergo CRC screening. Colonoscopy was the preferred screening method. Ignorance of and indifference to CRC risks were the major obstacles for a future screening colonoscopy.
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.