ArticleJournal of community health2018
Use of Evidence-Based Interventions and Implementation Strategies to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening in Federally Qualified Health Centers.
Article in Journal of community health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.
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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Large Language Models in Population Oncology: A Contemporary Review on the Use of Large Language Models to Support Data Collection, Aggregation, and Analysis in Cancer Care and Research.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2025Review
- 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
- Using the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model to inform meaningful partner engagement and the selection of implementation strategies to increase colorectal cancer screening in federally qualified health centers.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Cultural shifts: an examination of cervical cancer stigma across age groups in the Caribbean.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2024Article
- Article
- Participatory action research to develop and implement multicomponent, multilevel strategies for implementing colorectal cancer screening interventions in American Indian communities in New Mexico.Implementation science communications · 2024Article
- Engaging stakeholders in the use of an interactive simulation tool to support decision-making about the implementation of colorectal cancer screening interventions.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2023Article
- Twenty years of capacity building across the cancer prevention and control research network.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2023Review
- Twenty years of collaborative research to enhance community practice for cancer prevention and control.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2023Article
- Mi-CARE: Comparing Three Evidence-Based Interventions to Promote Colorectal Cancer Screening among Ethnic Minorities within Three Different Clinical Contexts.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Implementation of evidence-based primary cancer prevention interventions in MA community health centers: an explanatory sequential mixed methods study.Implementation science communications · 2023Article
- Implementing organized colorectal cancer screening programs in Europe-protocol for a systematic review of determinants and strategies.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- Implementation of evidence-based primary cancer prevention interventions in MA community health centers: an explanatory sequential mixed methods study.Research square · 2023Article
- Using cognitive interviews to improve a measure of organizational readiness for implementation.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Developing a co-production strategy to facilitate the adoption and implementation of evidence-based colorectal cancer screening interventions for rural health systems: a pilot study.Implementation science communications · 2022Article
- Multi-component interventions and change in screening rates in primary care clinics in the Colorectal Cancer Control Program.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Cross-sectional survey study of primary care clinics on evidence-based colorectal cancer screening intervention use.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2022Article
- Evaluating Uptake of Evidence-Based Interventions in 355 Clinics Partnering With the Colorectal Cancer Control Program, 2015-2018.Preventing chronic disease · 2022Article
- Source matters: a survey of cost variation for fecal immunochemical tests in primary care.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Access to Cancer Care Resources in a Federally Qualified Health Center: a Mixed Methods Study to Increase the Understanding of Met and Unmet Needs of Cancer Survivors.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
While colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates have been increasing in the general population, rates are considerably lower in Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), which serve a large proportion of uninsured and medically vulnerable patients. Efforts to screen eligible patients must be accelerated if we are to reach the national screening goal of 80% by 2018 and beyond. To inform this work, we conducted a survey of key informants at FQHCs in eight states to determine which evidence-based interventions (EBIs) to promote CRC screening are currently being used, and which implementation strategies are being employed to ensure that the interventions are executed as intended. One hundred and forty-eight FQHCs were invited to participate in the study, and 56 completed surveys were received for a response rate of 38%. Results demonstrated that provider reminder and recall systems were the most commonly used EBIs (44.6%) while the most commonly used implementation strategy was the identification of barriers (84.0%). The mean number of EBIs that were fully implemented at the centers was 2.4 (range 0-7) out of seven. Almost one-quarter of respondents indicated that their FQHCs were not using any EBIs to increase CRC screening. Full implementation of EBIs was correlated with higher CRC screening rates. These findings identify gaps as well as the preferences and needs of FQHCs in selecting and implementing EBIs for CRC screening.
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.