Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28764667›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2017

Patterns of participation over four rounds of annual fecal immunochemical test-based screening for colorectal cancer: what predicts rescreening?

Joanne M Osborne, Carlene Wilson, Amy Duncan, Stephen R Cole, Ingrid Flight, Deborah Turnbull, Donna L Hughes, Graeme P Young

Erratum issuedAbstract 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. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Observational
  5. Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Colorectal Cancer Screening Strategies Using Active Learning and Monte Carlo Simulation.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024
    Article
  6. Colorectal cancer screening: Modalities and adherence.World journal of gastroenterology · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Joanne M OsborneBowel Health Service and Flinders Centre for Innovation in Cancer, Adelaide, Australia.
Carlene WilsonFlinders Centre for Innovation in Cancer, Flinders University of South Australia, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia. carlene.wilson@flinders.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-1883-4690
Amy DuncanFlinders Centre for Innovation in Cancer, Flinders University of South Australia, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia.
Stephen R ColeBowel Health Service and Flinders Centre for Innovation in Cancer, Adelaide, Australia.
Ingrid FlightFlinders Centre for Innovation in Cancer, Flinders University of South Australia, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia.
Deborah TurnbullUniversity of Adelaide, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA, 5005, Australia.
Donna L HughesFlinders Centre for Innovation in Cancer, Flinders University of South Australia, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia.
Graeme P YoungFlinders Centre for Innovation in Cancer, Flinders University of South Australia, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundParticipation at the recommended intervals is critical for screening to be effective in reducing colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence. This study describes patterns of screening participation over four rounds of fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) to identify whether demographic variables and prior screening satisfaction are significantly associated with patterns of re-participation.

methodsBaseline surveys were mailed to 4000 South Australians randomly selected from the electoral-roll. Respondents (n = 1928/48.2%) were offered four annual FIT rounds. Screening participation and satisfaction at each round were recorded.

resultsStudy participation was 58.5, 66.9, 73.1 and 71.4% respectively over four rounds. Three participation patterns were described: consistent participation (43.1%), consistent non-participation (26.4%) and inconsistent participation (changeable; 30.5%), including intermittent and sustained change patterns. Sustained change described those who changed participatory behavior and then maintained for at least two rounds (n = 375/19.5%). Older people, and those not working were most likely to sustain participation. Younger invitees, especially men, were more likely to change participatory behavior and sustain the change. People with higher disadvantage, less education, not working and with no prior (pre-trial) screening experience were more likely to start participating and drop out. People dissatisfied with a prior screening test, including finding aspects embarrassing or unpleasant, were also more likely not to participate in annual screening or to drop out.

conclusionsThe findings identify those at risk of non- or inconsistent participation in rescreening. They should aid targeting of interventions for demographic groups at risk and ensuring screening experiences are not perceived as unpleasant or difficult.

Indexed as

Occult BloodAgedAustraliaColonoscopyColorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleGuideline AdherenceHumansIncidenceMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesAdherenceColorectal cancerDissatisfactionFecal occult blood testRe-screeningScreening

Identifiers

PMID28764667
PMCPMC5540393

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.