ReviewRisk management and healthcare policy2017
The NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Program: current perspectives on strategies for improvement.
Review in Risk management and healthcare policy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 3 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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Evaluating the potential impact of lifestyle-based behavior change interventions delivered at the time of colorectal cancer screening.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2024Pooled it
- Acceptability of alternative technologies compared with faecal immunochemical test and/or colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: A systematic review.Journal of medical screening · 2023Pooled it
- Overcoming the barriers to dissemination and implementation of quality measures for gastrointestinal endoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and United European Gastroenterology (UEG) position statement.United European gastroenterology journal · 2021Guideline
- Using a dark logic model to explore adverse effects in audit and feedback: a qualitative study of gaming in colonoscopy.BMJ quality & safety · 2022Trial
- Use of a GP-endorsed non-participant reminder letter to promote uptake of bowel scope screening: A randomised controlled trial in a hard-to-reach population.Preventive medicine · 2020Trial
- Change in the life expectancy gap among people with mental illness: a 14-year population-based cohort study in Australia.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2026Article
- The National Health Service-Galleri multicancer screening trial: explanation and justification of unique and important design issues.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
- Article
- Long-term colorectal cancer incidence in a post-endoscopic screening cohort, accounting for surveillance, by baseline polyp group, anatomic subsite, and sex.Journal of medical screening · 2025Article
- Rates of colorectal cancer diagnosis and mortality in people with severe mental illness: results from Australia's National Bowel Cancer Screening Programme.Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences · 2024Article
- Colorectal cancer risk stratification using a polygenic risk score in symptomatic primary care patients-a UK Biobank retrospective cohort study.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Article
- Text-message reminders to increase participation in colorectal cancer screening.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024Article
- Knowledge and Attitude of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients Toward Colorectal Cancer Risk, Its Management, and the Role of Healthcare Providers: A Cross-Sectional Study in the UK.Crohn's & colitis 360 · 2023Article
- Effectiveness of behavioural economics-based interventions to improve colorectal cancer screening participation: A rapid systematic review of randomised controlled trials.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Review
- Cervical screening attendance and cervical cancer risk among women who have sex with women.Journal of medical screening · 2021Article
- Management of early rectal cancer; current surgical options and future direction.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2021Review
- Recognising Colorectal Cancer in Primary Care.Advances in therapy · 2021Article
- Canadian Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines: Do They Need an Update Given Changing Incidence and Global Practice Patterns?Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Review
- Microbiome Analysis of More Than 2,000 NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme Samples Shows the Potential to Improve Screening Accuracy.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2021Article
- Aspects of colorectal cancer screening, methods, age and gender.Journal of internal medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in the UK. The English National Health Service (NHS) Bowel Cancer Screening Program (BCSP) was introduced in 2006 to improve CRC mortality by earlier detection of CRC. It is now offered to patients aged 60-74 years and involves a home-based guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBt) biennially, and if positive, patients are offered a colonoscopy. This has been associated with a 15% reduction in mortality. In 2013, an additional arm to BCSP was introduced, Bowelscope. This offers patients aged 55 years a one-off flexible sigmoidoscopy, and if several adenomas are found, the patients are offered a completion colonoscopy. BCSP has been associated with a significant stage shift in CRC diagnosis; however, the uptake of bowel cancer screening remains lower than that for other screening programs. Further work is required to understand the reasons for nonparticipation of patients to ensure optimal uptake. A change of gFOBt kit to the fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) in the English BCSP may further increase patient participation. This, in addition to increased yield of neoplasia and cancers with the FIT kit, is likely to further improve CRC outcomes in the screened population.
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.