Trial reportCancer2017
A centralized mailed program with stepped increases of support increases time in compliance with colorectal cancer screening guidelines over 5 years: A randomized trial.
Trial report in Cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Repeat Fecal Occult Blood Tests for Colorectal Cancer Screening.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2020Pooled it
- Interventions to improve adherence to surveillance guidelines in survivors of childhood cancer: a systematic review.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2019Pooled it
- The COMPASS study: A prospective, randomized, multi-center trial testing the impact of a clinic-based intervention informing patients of colorectal cancer screening options on screening completion.Contemporary clinical trials · 2022Trial
- A Centralized Program with Stepped Support Increases Adherence to Colorectal Cancer Screening Over 9 Years: a Randomized Trial.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Trial
- A stepped randomized trial to promote colorectal cancer screening in a nationwide sample of U.S. Veterans.Contemporary clinical trials · 2021Trial
- Characteristics and Effectiveness of Patient Navigation Programs on Colorectal Cancer Screening and Follow-Up Colonoscopy Uptake: A Systematic Review.AJPM focus · 2026Review
- Longitudinal retrospective study of real-world adherence to colorectal cancer screening before and after the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA.BMJ public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Barriers and facilitators of colorectal cancer screening using the 5As framework: A systematic review of US studies.Preventive medicine reports · 2023Review
- Chasm between Public Perceptions and Epidemiological Data on Colorectal Cancer.Gut and liver · 2023Article
- An investigation of efficient nursing interventions in early diagnosis of cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2021Article
- What Multilevel Interventions Do We Need to Increase the Colorectal Cancer Screening Rate to 80%?Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2021Review
- Factors Influencing Implementation of a Colorectal Cancer Screening Improvement Program in Community Health Centers: an Applied Use of Configurational Comparative Methods.Journal of general internal medicine · 2020Article
- Primary Care Provider Beliefs and Recommendations About Colorectal Cancer Screening in Four Healthcare Systems.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2020Article
- Strategies to Improve Persistent Adherence in Colorectal Cancer Screening.Gut and liver · 2020Review
- Methodologic Considerations in Calculating and Analyzing Proportion of Time Covered as a Measure of Longitudinal Cancer Screening Adherence.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2020Article
- Two Medicaid health plans' models and motivations for improving colorectal cancer screening rates.Translational behavioral medicine · 2020Article
- Variation in Colorectal Cancer Stage and Mortality across Large Community-Based Populations: PORTAL Colorectal Cancer Cohort.The Permanente journal · 2020Article
- A cost-effectiveness analysis of a colorectal cancer screening program in safety net clinics.Preventive medicine · 2019Article
- Modifiable Failures in the Colorectal Cancer Screening Process and Their Association With Risk of Death.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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundScreening over many years is required to optimize reductions in colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality. However, no prior trials have compared strategies for obtaining long-term adherence.
methodsSystems of Support to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening and Follow-Up was implemented in an integrated health care organization in Washington State. Between 2008 and 2009, 4675 individuals aged 50 to 74 years were randomized to receive the usual care (UC), which included clinic-based strategies to increase CRC screening (arm 1), or, in years 1 and 2, mailings with a call-in number for colonoscopy and mailed fecal tests (arm 2), mailings plus brief telephone assistance (arm 3), or mailings and assistance plus nurse navigation (arm 4). Active-intervention subjects (those in arms 2, 3, and 4 combined) who were still eligible for CRC screening were randomized to mailings being stopped or continued in years 3 and 5. The time in compliance with CRC screening over 5 years was compared for persons assigned to any intervention and persons assigned to UC. Screening tests contributed time on the basis of national guidelines for screening intervals (fecal tests annually, sigmoidoscopy every 5 years, and colonoscopy every 10 years).
resultsAll participants contributed data, but they were censored at disenrollment, death, the age of 76 years, or a diagnosis of CRC. Compared with UC participants, intervention participants had 31% more adjusted covered time over 5 years (incidence rate ratio, 1.31; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-1.37; covered time, 47.5% vs 62.1%). Fecal testing accounted for almost all additional covered time.
conclusionsIn a health care organization with clinic-based activities to increase CRC screening, a centralized program led to increased CRC screening adherence over 5 years. Longer term data on screening adherence and its impact on CRC outcomes are needed. Cancer 2017;123:4472-80. © 2017 American Cancer Society.
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.