Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29991294›Full record

ArticleHealth education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education2018

Assessing Levels and Correlates of Implementation of Evidence-Based Approaches for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Cross-Sectional Study With Federally Qualified Health Centers.

Timothy J Walker, Betsy Risendal, Michelle C Kegler, Daniela B Friedman, Bryan J Weiner, Rebecca S Williams, Shin-Ping Tu, Maria E Fernandez

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. A Multilevel Approach to Understand the Context and Potential Solutions for Low Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening Rates in Rural Appalachia Clinics.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

8 authors.

Timothy J Walker1 The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, TX, USA.
Betsy Risendal2 Colorado School of Public Health, Aurora, CO, USA.
Michelle C Kegler3 Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Daniela B Friedman4 University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.
Bryan J Weiner5 University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Rebecca S Williams6 The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Shin-Ping Tu7 University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA, USA.
Maria E Fernandez1 The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, TX, USA.

Funding

UNC CENTER FOR HEALTH PROMOTION AND DISEASE PREVENTIONU48DP001944 · DP · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI AMMERMAN, ALICE S · 2009 to 2013
$15.1M
HEALTH PROMOTION RESEARCH CENTERU48DP001911 · DP · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI AU, DAVID H, HARRIS, JEFFREY RANDALL · 2009 to 2013
$14.3M
BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE EDUCATION--CANCER PREVENTION/CONTROLR25CA057712 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI MULLEN, PATRICIA DOLAN · 1992 to 2017
$8.6M
HEALTH PROMOTION AND DISEASE PREVENTION RESEARCH CENTERS - CENTER CATEGORY 1U48DP001949 · DP · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI TORTOLERO, SUSAN · 2009 to 2013
$7.9M
BUILDING CAPACITY IN RURAL AND UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES: CTR. COMM. HEALTH DEVE. U48DP001924 · DP · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCE CTR · PI MCLEROY, KENNETH R. · 2009 to 2013
$7.6M
HARVARD PREVENTION RESEARCH CENTER ON NUTRITION AND PHYSICAL ACTIVITY-CATEGORY 1U48DP001946 · DP · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI GORTMAKER, STEVEN L · 2009 to 2013
$7.5M
ROCKY MOUNTAIN PREVENTION RESEARCH CENTERU48DP001938 · DP · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER/HSC DENVER · PI MARSHALL, JULIE · 2009 to 2013
$7.5M
HPDPRC SIP 13-66U48DP001903 · DP · SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY · PI BAKER, ELIZABETH A · 2009 to 2013
$7.3M
HEALTH PROMOTION AND DISEASE PREVENTION RESEARCH CENTERS: CENTER PROPOSAL CAT. 1U48DP001936 · DP · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA AT COLUMBIA · PI WILCOX, SARA · 2009 to 2013
$7.3M
UCLA/RAND PREVENTION RESEARCH CENTERU48DP001934 · DP · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI BASTANI, ROSHAN · 2009 to 2013
$5.9M
Cancer Training GrantR25CA116339 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BASCH, ETHAN M., REEVE, BRYCE B · 2008 to 2017
$4.0M
Cancer Prevention and Control Research Training and Career Development ProgramT32CA057712 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI Bijal A. Balasubramanian, Maria Eulalia Fernandez · 2018 to 2026
$3.2M
ACL HHS U48DP001944NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48 DP001903NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48 DP001911NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48 DP001924NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48 DP001934NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48 DP001936NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48 DP001938NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48 DP001944NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48 DP001946NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48 DP001949NCI NIH HHS R01 CA124397NCI NIH HHS R21 CA136460NCI NIH HHS R25 CA057712NCI NIH HHS R25 CA116339NCI NIH HHS T32 CA057712
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multiple evidence-based approaches (EBAs) exist to improve colorectal cancer screening in health clinics. The success of these approaches is tied to effective implementation. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to assess the implementation of EBAs for colorectal cancer screening and clinic-level correlates of implementation in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). We conducted descriptive and cross-sectional analyses using data collected from FQHC clinics across seven states ( n = 51). A clinic representative completed electronic surveys about clinic characteristics (e.g., size, patient characteristics, and medical record system characteristics) and the implementation of Community Guide recommended EBAs (e.g., client reminders, small media, and provider assessment and feedback). We used bivariate Spearman correlations to assess clinic-level correlates with implementation outcomes. Most clinics were planning to implement, in the early implementation stages, or inconsistently implementing EBAs. No EBA was fully implemented by more than nine (17.6%) clinics. Clinic size variables were inversely related to implementation levels of one-on-one education; medical record variables were directly related to implementation levels of client and provider reminders as well as provider assessment and feedback; and rapid and timely feedback from clinic leaders was directly associated with implementation levels of four out of six EBAs. Given the varying levels of implementation, clinics need to assess current use of implementation strategies and improve effective program delivery to increase colorectal cancer screening among their patients. In addition, clinics should also consider how their characteristics may support or serve as a barrier to implementation in their respective settings.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerEvidence-Based PracticeImplementation ScienceColorectal NeoplasmsCross-Sectional StudiesHumansPovertyPrimary Health CareSafety-net ProvidersSurveys and Questionnairescancer prevention and screeningcolorectal cancercommunity health centersevidence-based-approachesimplementation and dissemination

Identifiers

PMID29991294
PMCPMC6226355

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.