ArticlePreventive medicine2018
Estimating health benefits and cost-savings for achieving the Healthy People 2020 objective of reducing invasive colorectal cancer.
Article in Preventive medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of an Artificial Intelligence-Based Computer Aided Detection System (CADe) on Colonoscopies Performed in Hawai'i.Hawai'i journal of health & social welfare · 2026Article
- Estimating the impact of increasing cervical cancer screening in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program among low-income women in the USA.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2020Article
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
This study aims to quantify the aggregate potential life-years (LYs) saved and healthcare cost-savings if the Healthy People 2020 objective were met to reduce invasive colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence by 15%. We identified patients (n=886,380) diagnosed with invasive CRC between 2001 and 2011 from a nationally representative cancer dataset. We stratified these patients by sex, race/ethnicity, and age. Using these data and data from the 2001-2011 U.S. life tables, we estimated a survival function for each CRC group and the corresponding reference group and computed per-person LYs saved. We estimated per-person annual healthcare cost-savings using the 2008-2012 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. We calculated aggregate LYs saved and cost-savings by multiplying the reduced number of CRC patients by the per-person LYs saved and lifetime healthcare cost-savings, respectively. We estimated an aggregate of 84,569 and 64,924 LYs saved for men and women, respectively, accounting for healthcare cost-savings of $329.3 and $294.2 million (in 2013$), respectively. Per person, we estimated 6.3 potential LYs saved related to those who developed CRC for both men and women, and healthcare cost-savings of $24,000 for men and $28,000 for women. Non-Hispanic whites and those aged 60-64 had the highest aggregate potential LYs saved and cost-savings. Achieving the HP2020 objective of reducing invasive CRC incidence by 15% by year 2020 would potentially save nearly 150,000 life-years and $624 million on healthcare costs.
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.