ArticlePublic health reviews
Personalized cancer screening: helping primary care rise to the challenge.
Article in Public health reviews. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Delayed or failure to follow-up abnormal breast cancer screening mammograms in primary care: a systematic review.BMC cancer · 2021Pooled it
- Breast cancer screening best practices: a Canadian multidisciplinary consensus-based approach for primary care providers.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Primary care provider practices, attitudes, and confidence with hereditary cancer risk assessment and testing: A mixed methods study.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2025Article
- Article
- Navigating the uncertainty of precision cancer screening: The role of shared decision-making.PEC innovation · 2023Article
- Enabling System Functionalities of Primary Care Practices for Team Dynamics in Transformation to Team-Based Care: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA).Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- A pragmatic implementation research study for In Our DNA SC: a protocol to identify multi-level factors that support the implementation of a population-wide genomic screening initiative in diverse populations.Implementation science communications · 2022Article
- Article
- Cancer screening simulation models: a state of the art review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Review
- A Step towards Understanding and Tackling Health Inequalities: The Use of Secondary Prevention Services and the Need for Health Promotion in a Rural Setting.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Toward a Population-Based Breast Cancer Risk Stratification Approach? The Needs and Concerns of Healthcare Providers.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
- THE FUTURE OF MEDICINE, healthcare innovation through precision medicine: policy case study of Qatar.Life sciences, society and policy · 2020Review
- A Primary Care Provider's Guide to Preventive Health After Spinal Cord Injury.Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation · 2020Article
- Straight-to-test for the two-week-wait colorectal cancer pathway under the updated NICE guidelines reduces time to cancer diagnosis and treatment.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2019Article
- Health professionals' perspectives on breast cancer risk stratification: understanding evaluation of risk versus screening for disease.Public health reviews · 2019Review
- Scrutinizing screening: a critical interpretive review of primary care provider perspectives on mammography decision-making with average-risk women.Public health reviews · 2018Review
- Understanding User Acceptance of Clinical Decision Support Systems to Promote Increased Cancer Screening Rates in a Primary Care Practice.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With their longitudinal patient relationships, primary care physicians and their care teams are uniquely situated to promote preventive medicine, including cancer screening. A confluence of forces is driving the demand for the personalization of cancer screening recommendations. Recommendations are increasingly based on individual patient preferences, medical history, genetic and environmental risk factors, and level of interaction with the healthcare system. Current examples include choices between colonoscopy, fecal testing, and emerging tests for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening; the use of genetic information and availability of home self-testing in cervical cancer screening; the integration of multiple risk factors and patient preferences to decide the intensity and length of breast cancer screening; and the issues of smoking cessation and competing priorities when deciding whether or not to pursue lung cancer screening. These changes will inevitably increase the burden on primary care of providing high-quality cancer screening to their patients. To address, primary care physicians need access to continuously updated evidence reviews including prioritization of strongly supported recommendations, training in shared decision-making and tools for preference diagnosis, and an electronic health record (EHR) and reimbursement model that allow for population health management and team-based care. Only by reinforcing cancer screening in primary care can we ensure that personalized cancer screening is accessible and evidence-based.
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.