Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28490420›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2017

Testing the Effectiveness of a Primary Care Intervention to Improve Uptake of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Controlled Trial Protocol.

Natalie Dodd, Mariko Leanne Carey, Elise Mansfield, Christopher Oldmeadow

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Natalie DoddUniversity of Newcastle, School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Callaghan, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1032-3770
Mariko Leanne CareyUniversity of Newcastle, School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Callaghan, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0549-1115
Elise MansfieldUniversity of Newcastle, School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Callaghan, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7938-8401
Christopher OldmeadowUniversity of Newcastle, School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Callaghan, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6104-1322

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundScreening for colorectal cancer (CRC) significantly reduces mortality associated with this disease. In Australia, the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program provides regular fecal occult blood tests (FOBT) for those aged 50 to 74 years, however, participation rates in the program have plateaued at 36%. Given low uptake in the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program, it is necessary to explore alternate methods to increase CRC screening rates. Primary care is a promising adjunct setting to test methods to increase CRC screening participation. Primary care guidelines support the recommendation and provision of CRC screening to primary care patients. Those in the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program target age range frequently present to their primary care provider.

objectiveThis study tests the effect that a multicomponent primary care-based intervention has on CRC screening uptake when compared to usual care.

methodsPrimary care patients presenting for an appointment with their primary care provider complete a touchscreen survey to determine eligibility for the trial. Those aged 50 to 74 years, at average risk of CRC, with no history of CRC or inflammatory bowel disease, who have not had an FOBT in the past 2 years or a colonoscopy in the past 5 years are eligible to participate in the trial. Trial participants are randomized to the intervention or usual care group by day of attendance at the practice. The intervention consists of provision of an FOBT, printed information sheet, and primary care provider endorsement to complete the FOBT. The usual care group receives no additional care.

resultsThe primary outcome is completion of CRC screening 6 weeks after recruitment. The proportion of patients completing CRC screening will be compared between trial groups using a logistic regression model.

conclusionsCRC screening rates in Australia are suboptimal and interventions to increase screening participation are urgently required. This protocol describes the process of implementing a multicomponent intervention designed to increase CRC screening uptake in a primary care setting.

trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12616001299493; https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=371136&isReview=true (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6pL0VYIj6). Universal Trial Number U1111-1185-6120.

Indexed as

clinical trialcolorectal cancerearly detection of cancergeneral practiceprimary careprimary care provider

Identifiers

PMID28490420
PMCPMC5443911

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.