GuidelineThe American journal of gastroenterology2017
Colorectal Cancer Screening: Recommendations for Physicians and Patients from the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer.
Guideline in The American journal of gastroenterology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 4 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 341 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Effectiveness and Implementation of mPATH-CRC: a Mobile Health System for Colorectal Cancer Screening
Real-World Validation of an Artificial Intelligence Characterization Support (CADx) System for Prediction of Polyp Histology in Colonoscopy: A Prospective Multicentre Study
Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Trainee Adenoma Detection Rate
A Single-Center, Randomized, Prospective, Single-Blinded Study to Assess the Safety, Quality, and Tolerance of a Bowel Preparation Using a Food Kit With Laxatives in a United States Veteran Population
Who cites it
341 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 793 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fecal DNA SDC2 methylation test for colorectal cancer diagnosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Biomolecules & biomedicine · 2026Pooled it
- The Italian Unitary Society of Colon-Proctology (Società Italiana Unitaria di Colonproctologia) guidelines for the management of acute and chronic hemorrhoidal disease.Annals of coloproctology · 2024Guideline
- Delphi Initiative for Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer (DIRECt) International Management Guidelines.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2023Guideline
- Performance and comparison of artificial intelligence and human experts in the detection and classification of colonic polyps.BMC gastroenterology · 2022Pooled it
- Systematic review of shared decision-making in guidelines about colorectal cancer screening.European journal of cancer care · 2022Pooled it
- Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines Are Primarily Based on Low-Moderate-Quality Evidence.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2021Pooled it
- Computer-Aided Diagnosis of Diminutive Colorectal Polyps in Endoscopic Images: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- Imaging alternatives to colonoscopy: CT colonography and colon capsule. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) Guideline - Update 2020.European radiology · 2021Guideline
- A Randomized Trial of Choice Architecture and Mailed Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach in a Community Health Setting.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Effect of Patient-Directed Messaging on Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2022Trial
- The Role of Computational Models in the Detection of Colorectal Carcinoma and Precancerous Lesions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Status of robotic and manual devices for advanced colonoscopy: Trends and applications of robotics in colonoscopy.World journal of gastrointestinal pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Review
- Non-invasive colorectal cancer screening: emerging tools and clinical evidence.Clinical endoscopy · 2026Review
- Long-term effectiveness of a two-step colorectal cancer screening strategy and risk of colorectal cancer after polypectomy.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2026Article
- Association Between Colonoscopy Withdrawal Time and Adenoma Detection: Evidence of a Continuous Dose-Response Relationship.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The efficacy of colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Preventive medicine reports · 2026Review
- Assessing the content and quality of gastrointestinal endoscopy videos on TikTok, Bilibili, and Kwai: a cross - sectional study.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Colorectal Cancer Screening in Hereditary and Familial High-Risk Populations: Best Practices and Future Directions.International journal of cancer · 2026Review
- Review
281 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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 at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This document updates the colorectal cancer (CRC) screening recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force of Colorectal Cancer (MSTF), which represents the American College of Gastroenterology, the American Gastroenterological Association, and The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. CRC screening tests are ranked in 3 tiers based on performance features, costs, and practical considerations. The first-tier tests are colonoscopy every 10 years and annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Colonoscopy and FIT are recommended as the cornerstones of screening regardless of how screening is offered. Thus, in a sequential approach based on colonoscopy offered first, FIT should be offered to patients who decline colonoscopy. Colonoscopy and FIT are recommended as tests of choice when multiple options are presented as alternatives. A risk-stratified approach is also appropriate, with FIT screening in populations with an estimated low prevalence of advanced neoplasia and colonoscopy screening in high prevalence populations. The second-tier tests include CT colonography every 5 years, the FIT-fecal DNA test every 3 years, and flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 to 10 years. These tests are appropriate screening tests, but each has disadvantages relative to the tier 1 tests. Because of limited evidence and current obstacles to use, capsule colonoscopy every 5 years is a third-tier test. We suggest that the Septin9 serum assay (Epigenomics, Seattle, Wash) not be used for screening. Screening should begin at age 50 years in average-risk persons, except in African Americans in whom limited evidence supports screening at 45 years. CRC incidence is rising in persons under age 50, and thorough diagnostic evaluation of young persons with suspected colorectal bleeding is recommended. Discontinuation of screening should be considered when persons up to date with screening, who have prior negative screening (particularly colonoscopy), reach age 75 or have <10 years of life expectancy. Persons without prior screening should be considered for screening up to age 85, depending on age and comorbidities. Persons with a family history of CRC or a documented advanced adenoma in a first-degree relative age <60 years or 2 first-degree relatives with these findings at any age are recommended to undergo screening by colonoscopy every 5 years, beginning 10 years before the age at diagnosis of the youngest affected relative or age 40, whichever is earlier. Persons with a single first-degree relative diagnosed at ≥60 years with CRC or an advanced adenoma can be offered average-risk screening options beginning at age 40 years.
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.