ArticlePatient preference and adherence2018
Waiting for diagnostic colonoscopy: a qualitative exploration of screening participants' experiences in a FIT-based colorectal cancer screening program.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Experience and satisfaction of participants in colorectal cancer screening programs: a qualitative evidence synthesis.BMC public health · 2024Pooled it
- Experience of NHS diagnostic investigation following a multi-cancer early detection (MCED) screening test: qualitative interviews with NHS-Galleri trial participants who had a cancer signal detected.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- The impact of cancer expectations on psychological responses following a cancer signal detected result in asymptomatic multi-cancer detection (MCED) testing.British journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Re-evaluating population-level screening recommendations to address increasing early-onset colorectal cancer rates in Australia: a modelling study.ESMO gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Patient and healthcare professionals' perceptions of a combined blood and faecal immunochemical test for excluding colorectal cancer diagnosis in primary care.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Article
- Screening for Breast, Cervical and Prostate Cancers in Kazakhstan: Key Factors and Psychological Aspects.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2023Article
- Adherence to the new policy framework of the World Cancer Research Fund International in developing a policy package for the prevention of gastrointestinal cancers in Iran: a Delphi study.Global health action · 2021Article
- Patients without colonoscopic follow-up after abnormal fecal immunochemical tests are often unaware of the abnormal result and report several barriers to colonoscopy.BMC gastroenterology · 2020Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of colorectal cancer screening in a low incidence country: The case of Saudi Arabia.Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology AssociationArticle
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
backgroundParticipants in population-based screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) may experience increased anxiety immediately after a positive screening test, but research in this area is limited. The objective of this study was to explore how screening participants experience a positive test result and cope with the pre-diagnostic waiting period in a CRC screening program. MATERIALS AND
methodsScreening participants with a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) result were identified in the Danish national CRC program before they attended diagnostic colonoscopy. Sixteen screening participants were selected for an interview in their own homes, using a semi-structured interview guide. Transcribed data were analyzed thematically.
resultsThe most prominent themes were symptom appraisal and communication strategies. Most participants attributed the positive FIT result showing blood in the stool to pre-existing non-malignant conditions but a few were very worried about the FIT result and the outcome of the colonoscopy. Communication strategies included discussions with family or friends about the positive FIT result and the upcoming colonoscopy, or containing information until the colonoscopy had provided the definitive diagnostic result. There was no apparent need for communication with health care professionals during the pre-diagnostic waiting period.
conclusionThe pre-diagnostic waiting period between positive FIT result and colonoscopy in a population-based screening program may cause worry for some participants, potentially to require support, but most people consider it unconcerning. Screening providers should communicate to all screening participants in written form that negative emotional responses may occur after a positive screening result. This is particularly important in screening programs using self-sample kits without the presence of a health care professional to reassure the few participants who may experience significant anxiety.
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.