SynthesisAnnals of internal medicine2017
Interventions to Improve Follow-up of Positive Results on Fecal Blood Tests: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Annals of internal medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 71 papers, 4 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
71 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 116 citations in OpenAlex.
- Improving Diagnostic Colonoscopy Completion After Positive Stool-Based Screening in Health-Disparity Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Periprocedural Bridging in Patients with Venous Thromboembolism: A Systematic Review.The American journal of medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Evaluation of Interventions Intended to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA internal medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Timely follow-up of positive cancer screening results: A systematic review and recommendations from the PROSPR Consortium.CA: a cancer journal for clinicians · 2018Pooled it
- Patient Navigation to Improve Colonoscopy Completion After an Abnormal Stool Test Result : A Randomized Controlled Trial.Annals of internal medicine · 2025Trial
- Multilevel intervention for follow-up of abnormal FIT in the safety-net: IMProving Adherence to Colonoscopy through Teams and Technology (IMPACTT).Contemporary clinical trials · 2025Trial
- Blood Test Increases Colorectal Cancer Screening in Persons Who Declined Colonoscopy and Fecal Immunochemical Test: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2023Trial
- Precision Patient Navigation to Improve Rates of Follow-up Colonoscopy, An Individual Randomized Effectiveness Trial.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2021Trial
- Lower Abnormal Fecal Immunochemical Test Cut-Off Values Improve Detection of Colorectal Cancer in System-Level Screens.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2020Trial
- Prospective Cohort study of Predictors of Follow-Up Diagnostic Colonoscopy from a Pragmatic Trial of FIT Screening.Scientific reports · 2020Trial
- Rates and Timing of Follow-up Colonoscopy After a Positive Stool-Based Test in an Integrated Health System.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Stool DNA-based SDC2 Methylation Test for the Screening of Colorectal Neoplasia in an Asymptomatic, Average-Risk Population.The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi · 2026Article
- What makes patient navigation work? Identifying functions and forms and conducting causal loop diagramming to specify components of a successful colorectal cancer patient navigation program.Implementation science communications · 2026Article
- County-level social, preventive care, and behavioral correlates of colorectal cancer mortality in the United States: a nationwide ecological analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- A Qualitative Study of Staff and Provider Experiences with Follow-up Colonoscopy in a Community Health Center and Gastroenterology Specialty.Journal of cancer prevention · 2025Article
- Article
- Comparing the effectiveness of implementation strategies to improve liver and colon cancer screening for Veterans: protocol for a large cluster-randomized implementation study.Implementation science : IS · 2025Article
- Novel colorectal cancer screening methods - opportunities and challenges.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2025Review
- Review
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on adherence to diagnostic colonoscopy after a positive non-invasive screening test for colorectal cancer in two Indiana healthcare systems.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
11 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 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFecal immunochemical testing is the most commonly used method for colorectal cancer screening worldwide. However, its effectiveness is frequently undermined by failure to obtain follow-up colonoscopy after positive test results. PURPOSE: To evaluate interventions to improve rates of follow-up colonoscopy for adults after a positive result on a fecal test (guaiac or immunochemical). DATA SOURCES: English-language studies from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and Embase from database inception through June 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized and nonrandomized studies reporting an intervention for colonoscopy follow-up of asymptomatic adults with positive fecal test results. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently extracted data and ranked study quality; 2 rated overall strength of evidence for each category of study type. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-three studies were eligible for analysis, including 7 randomized and 16 nonrandomized studies. Three were at low risk of bias. Eleven studies described patient-level interventions (changes to invitation, provision of results or follow-up appointments, and patient navigators), 5 provider-level interventions (reminders or performance data), and 7 system-level interventions (automated referral, precolonoscopy telephone calls, patient registries, and quality improvement efforts). Moderate evidence supported patient navigators and provider reminders or performance data. Evidence for system-level interventions was low. Seventeen studies reported the proportion of test-positive patients who completed colonoscopy compared with a control population, with absolute differences of -7.4 percentage points (95% CI, -19 to 4.3 percentage points) to 25 percentage points (CI, 14 to 35 percentage points). LIMITATION: More than half of studies were at high or very high risk of bias; heterogeneous study designs and characteristics precluded meta-analysis.
conclusionPatient navigators and giving providers reminders or performance data may help improve colonoscopy rates of asymptomatic adults with positive fecal blood test results. Current evidence about useful system-level interventions is scant and insufficient. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Cancer Institute. (PROSPERO: CRD42016048286).
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.