ArticlePreventive medicine2018
Colorectal cancer screening in the United States: Trends from 2008 to 2015 and variation by health insurance coverage.
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 88 papers, 2 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
88 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Global colorectal cancer screening programs and coverage rate estimation: an evidence synthesis.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Prevalence and Clinical Features of Sessile Serrated Polyps: A Systematic Review.Gastroenterology · 2020Pooled it
- Facilitation of Health Plan-Clinic Partnerships to Improve Colorectal Cancer Screening for Rural Medicaid Enrollees: A Qualitative Study.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2026Trial
- Mailed Outreach and Patient Navigation for Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Rural Medicaid Enrollees: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 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
- Predictors of Colorectal Cancer Screening Among African American Men Living with HIV.Journal of community health · 2021Trial
- Patients' Reactions to Being Offered Financial Incentives to Increase Colorectal Screening: A Qualitative Analysis.American journal of health promotion : AJHP · 2021Trial
- Financial Incentives to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake and Decrease Disparities: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2019Trial
- The Prevalence and Comorbidities of Self-Reported Mental Health Disorders Among Primary Healthcare Attendees in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Survey.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Use of Cancer Screening Tests, United States, 2023.Preventing chronic disease · 2025Article
- Body mass index and colorectal cancer screening among cancer survivors: the role of sociodemographic characteristics.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Article
- Recent trends in self-reported utilization of colonoscopy and fecal occult blood test in Europe: analysis of the European Health Interview Surveys 2013-2015 and 2018-2020.European journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Residential Segregation and Colorectal Cancer Screening in the United States, 2010 to 2018.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025Article
- Predictors of Colon Cancer Screening Among the Saudi Population at Primary Healthcare Settings in Riyadh.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Projected Impact and Cost-Effectiveness of Novel Molecular Blood-Based or Stool-Based Screening Tests for Colorectal Cancer.Annals of internal medicine · 2024Article
- Utilization of colorectal cancer screening tests: a systematic review and time trend analysis of nationally representative data.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Review
- Nativity Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Hispanics in the United States.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2024Article
- Comparative Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening With Blood-Based Biomarkers (Liquid Biopsy) vs Fecal Tests or Colonoscopy.Gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Identification of Priorities for Colorectal Cancer Screening Interventions Among US Hispanic/Latino Populations.American journal of public health · 2024Article
- Colorectal cancer information avoidance is associated with screening adherence.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2024Article
28 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Regular colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is recommended for reducing CRC incidence and mortality. This paper provides an updated analysis of CRC screening in the United States (US) and examines CRC screening by several features of health insurance coverage. Recommendation-consistent CRC screening was calculated for adults aged 50-75 in 2008, 2010, 2013 and 2015 using data from the National Health Interview Survey. CRC screening prevalence in 2015 was described overall and by sociodemographic subgroups. CRC screening by health insurance coverage was further examined using multivariable logistic regression, stratified by age (50-64 years and 65-75 years) and adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, sex, education, income, time in US, and comorbid conditions. Recommendation-consistent screening increased from 51.6% in 2008 to 58.3% in 2010 (p < 0.001). Use plateaued from 2010 to 2013 but increased to 61.3% in 2015 (p < 0.001). In 2015, adults aged 50-64 years with traditional employer-sponsored private insurance were more likely to be screened (62.2%) than those with traditional private direct purchase plans (50.9%) and the uninsured (24.8%) (p < 0.01, respectively). After multivariable adjustment, differences between traditional employer-sponsored private insurance and the uninsured remained statistically significant. Adults aged 65-75 with Medicare and private insurance were more likely to be screened (76.3%) than those with Medicare, no supplemental insurance (68.8%) or Medicare and Medicaid (65.2%) (p < 0.001). After multivariable adjustment, the differences between Medicare and private insurance and Medicare no supplemental insurance remained statistically significant. CRC screening rates have increased over time, but certain segments of the population, especially the uninsured, continue to screen below recommended levels.
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.