Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28558663›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2017

Reasons for never and intermittent completion of colorectal cancer screening after receiving multiple rounds of mailed fecal tests.

Beverly B Green, June BlueSpruce, Leah Tuzzio, Sally W Vernon, L Aubree Shay, Sheryl L Catz

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00697047 (Systems of Support to Increase Colon Cancer Screening and Follow-up), which is not on this map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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.

NCT00697047 nacompletednot on this map

Systems of Support to Increase Colon Cancer Screening and Follow-up

TypeinterventionalSponsorKaiser PermanenteRan2008 to 2019Enrolled4,653ConditionsColorectal CancerArmsAutomated Mailing, Automated Mailing Plus Assisted, Auto Plus Assisted Plus Navigation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Financial Literacy, Financial Education, and Cancer Screening Behavior: Evidence from Japan.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  14. A Qualitative Analysis of Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening among Korean Americans.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Beverly B GreenKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Metropolitan Park East, 1730 Minor Avenue Suite 1600, Seattle, WA, 98101, USA. green.b@ghc.org.
June BlueSpruceKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Metropolitan Park East, 1730 Minor Avenue Suite 1600, Seattle, WA, 98101, USA.
Leah TuzzioKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Metropolitan Park East, 1730 Minor Avenue Suite 1600, Seattle, WA, 98101, USA.
Sally W VernonUniversity of Texas Health Science Center Houston, School of Public Health, 1200 Pressler Street, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
L Aubree ShayUniversity of Texas Health Science Center Houston, School of Public Health, 1200 Pressler Street, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Sheryl L CatzKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Metropolitan Park East, 1730 Minor Avenue Suite 1600, Seattle, WA, 98101, USA.
Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute · USThe University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston · USUniversity of California, Davis · US

Funding

BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE EDUCATION--CANCER PREVENTION/CONTROLR25CA057712 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI MULLEN, PATRICIA DOLAN · 1992 to 2017
$8.6M
Systems of Support (SOS) to Increase Colon Cancer Screening and Follow-upR01CA121125 · NCI · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI GREEN, BEVERLY BETH · 2007 to 2017
$8.0M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA121125NCI NIH HHS R25 CA057712
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLong-term adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is particularly important for fecal testing. Some U.S. studies report that only 25% of individuals repeat fecal testing annually. The purpose of this qualitative study was to identify barriers and facilitators reported by patients with suboptimal screening adherence to refine interventions for starting ongoing adherence to CRC screening. We also explored whether participants, particularly never screeners, would be willing to do a CRC screening blood test.

methodsForty-one patients who previously enrolled in the Systems of Support to Increase CRC Screening (SOS) trial were interviewed 4-5 years later. Participants were purposively selected to include men and women with diverse race/ethnicities who had either been inconsistent screeners or had never screened during the first three years of SOS despite receiving at least two rounds of mailed fecal tests. Two interviewers conducted 30-min telephone interviews using a semi-structured interview guide. An iterative thematic analysis approach was used.

resultsThemes related to screening barriers were more pervasive among never screeners including: (1) Avoidance (inattention, procrastination) (2) Concerns about handling stool; (3) Health concerns; (4) Fear of a cancer diagnosis or positive test results. Themes related to screening facilitators were more often mentioned by participants who screened at least once including: (1) Use of a simpler 1-sample fecal test; (2) Convenience of mailings and doing the test at home; (3) Salience of prevention, especially as one got older; and (4) Influence of recommendations from providers, family and friends. Participants had diverse preferences for the number (3 on average) and types (phone, mail, text) of screening reminders. Some participants did not prefer e-mail links to the patient shared electronic health record because of difficulties remembering their password. It was acceptable for a nurse or medical assistant not from their clinic to call them as long as that person was knowledgeable about their records and could communicate with their physician. Participants, especially never screeners, were generally very enthusiastic about the potential option of a CRC screening blood test.

conclusionFuture CRC screening programs should be designed to minimize these barriers and maximize facilitators to improve long-term screening adherence.

trial registrationPrimary Funding Agency: The National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health (R01CA121125). Registered at clinicaltrials.gov NCT00697047 .

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedOccult BloodPatient CompliancePostal ServiceQualitative ResearchAdherenceBarriers and facilitatorsColorectal cancer screeningFecal testingQualitative research

Identifiers

PMID28558663
PMCPMC5450259
OpenAlexW2617433098

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.