Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29960585›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2018

Colorectal cancer and screening awareness and sources of information in the Hungarian population.

Noémi Gede, Diána Reményi Kiss, István Kiss

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Colorectal Cancer-The Worst Enemy Is the One We Do Not Know.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Improving Colon Cancer Prevention in Poland. A Long Way Off.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Noémi GedeInstitute for Translational Medicine, Medical School, and Doctoral School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pécs, Szigeti út 12, Pécs, 7624, Hungary. gede.noemi@gmail.com.
Diána Reményi KissDoctoral School of Health Sciences, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.
István KissDepartment of Public Health Medicine, Medical School, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.
University of Pecs · HU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aims to survey the level of awareness of colorectal cancer and screening and to identify sources of information among the population under investigation.

methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among 1150 adults between the ages of 40 and 70 using quota sampling. Data were collected through self-made questionnaires to be completed by respondents.

results32.7% of the participants correctly identified the recommended beginning of colorectal cancer screening, these participants were more likely to see their physician more frequently in the past years than those answering to the qusetion incorrectly (p = 0.008). 22.4% of the respondents were in possession of appropriate information on the frequency of colorectal cancer screening and had a relatively high level of educational attainment (p < 0.001). Very few respondents were well-informed about the risk factors and symptoms of colorectal cancer. Those who were well-informed were likely to live in a county town (p < 0.001) and to have a relatively high level of educational attainment (p < 0.001). They were most likely to have accessed their information on the internet. 27.0% of respondents had not heard of CRC screening methods before. They were likely to be male and relatively young and to have a relatively low level of educational attainment. Furthermore, they saw their doctor relatively seldom. The respondents who had heard about screening methods were most likely to have gathered their information from health workers.

conclusionsThe majority of respondents did not have sufficient information about colorectal cancer and screening. This is particularly true of less educated, younger male participants who do not live in a county town and of respondents who see their physician relatively seldom. Sources of information should be used more effectively, thus yielding an increased level of awareness.

Indexed as

Consumer Health InformationHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth PersonnelInternetAdultAgedAge FactorsColorectal NeoplasmsCross-Sectional StudiesEarly Detection of CancerEducational StatusFemaleHumansHungaryMaleMiddle AgedAwarenessColorectal cancerCross-sectionalPreventionScreening

Identifiers

PMID29960585
PMCPMC6026511
OpenAlexW2811483238

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.