ReviewAIMS public health2017
Approaching the Hard-to-Reach in Organized Colorectal Cancer Screening: an Overview of Individual, Provider and System Level Coping Strategies.
Review in AIMS public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled 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
- Colorectal cancer screening, incidence, and mortality among aging veterans in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare system by housing status.GeroScience · 2026Article
- Perceptions and Attitudes Toward Utilizing a Non-Invasive Biomarker for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Qualitative Study.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Improving uptake of colorectal cancer screening by complex patients at an academic primary care practice: a feasibility study.BMJ open quality · 2024Article
- Colorectal Cancer Knowledge and Screening Change in African Americans: Implementation Phase Results of the EPICS Cluster RCT.AJPM focus · 2023Article
- Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening and Surveillance in Homeless Patients: A Case Report and Policy Recommendations.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the proven effectiveness of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening on reduction of CRC mortality, the uptake of CRC screening remains low. Participation rate is one of determinants for the success of organized population-based screening program. This review aims to identify those who are hard-to-reach, and summarize the strategies to increase their screening rate from individual, provider and system levels.
methodsA systematic search of electronic English databases was conducted on the factors and strategies of uptake in CRC screening for the hard-to-reach population up to May 2017. DISCUSSION: The coverage rate and participation rate are two indexes to identify the hard-to-reach population in organized CRC screening program. However, the homeless, new immigrants, people with severe mental illness, the jail intimates, and people with characteristics including lower education levels and/or low socioeconomic status, living in rural/remote areas, without insurance, and racial minorities are usually recognized as hard-to-reach populations. For them, organized screening programs offer a better coverage, while novel invitation approaches for eligible individuals and multiple strategies from primary care physicians are still needed to enhance screening rates among subjects who are hard-to-reach. Suggestions implied the effectiveness of interventions at the system level, including linkages to general practice; use of decision making tools; enlisting supports from coalition; and the continuum from screening to diagnosis and treatment.
conclusionOrganized CRC screening offers a system access to approach the hard-to-reach populations. To increase their uptake, multiple and novel strategies from individual, provider and system levels should be applied. For policymakers, public healthcare providers and community stakeholders, it is a test to tailor their potential needs and increase their participation rates through continuous efforts to eliminate disparities and inequity in CRC screening service.
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.