ArticlePreventing chronic disease2018
Patterns and Trends in Cancer Screening in the United States.
Article in Preventing chronic disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 165 papers, 4 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
165 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Motivational Interviewing to Improve the Uptake of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Interventions for cancer screening among Chinese Americans: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2022Pooled it
- Patient Adherence to Screening for Lung Cancer in the US: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2020Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of Leveraging Social Determinants of Health to Improve Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.JAMA oncology · 2020Pooled it
- Evaluating the Reach of a Patient Navigation Program for Follow-up Colonoscopy in a Large Federally Qualified Health Center.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2024Trial
- Bundling Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach with Screening for Social Risk in Federally Qualified Health Centers: A Stepped-Wedge Implementation-Effectiveness Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2024Trial
- Uptake of colorectal cancer screening after mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach in a newly eligible 45-49-year-old community health center population.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2023Trial
- Clinical Decision Support with or without Shared Decision Making to Improve Preventive Cancer Care: A Cluster-Randomized Trial.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022Trial
- Project ACTIVE: a Randomized Controlled Trial of Personalized and Patient-Centered Preventive Care in an Urban Safety-Net Setting.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Trial
- Repeat Annual Colorectal Cancer Screening in Rural Community Clinics: A Randomized Clinical Trial to Evaluate Outreach Strategies to Sustain Screening.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2020Trial
- Acceptability of HPV self-sampling in three urban academic emergency departments.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Longitudinal Adherence to Screening for Colorectal, Cervical, and Lung Cancer in a US Consortium.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Efficiency of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Testing in Cervical Cancer Screening and Vaccination: A Review.Cureus · 2026Review
- Unlocking the Translational Potential of Nanophotonic Biosensors: Perspectives on Application-Guided Design.ACS photonics · 2025Review
- Public knowledge, attitudes, practices, and key influencing factors regarding cancer screening in Yemen.Conflict and health · 2025Article
- Article
- Epidemiology of Colon Cancer Screening in a Safety-Net Setting.AJPM focus · 2025Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of liver cancer screening among high-risk populations in China.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Trends in incidence and mortality of early-onset gastrointestinal cancers: a comprehensive study.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Article
105 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionWe examined the prevalence of cancer screening reported in 2015 among US adults, adjusted for important sociodemographic and access-to-care variables. By using data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) for 2000 through 2015, we examined trends in prevalence of cancer screening that adhered to US Preventive Services Task Force screening recommendations in order to monitor screening progress among traditionally underserved population subgroups.
methodsWe analyzed NHIS data from surveys from 2000 through 2015 to estimate prevalence and trends in use of recommended screening tests for breast, cervical, colorectal, and prostate cancers. We used logistic regression and report predictive margins for population subgroups adjusted for various socioeconomic and demographic variables.
resultsColorectal cancer screening was the only test that increased during the study period. We found disparities in prevalence of test use among subgroups for all tests examined. Factors that reduced the use of screening tests included no contact with a doctor in the past year, no usual source of health care, and no insurance coverage.
conclusionUnderstanding use of cancer screening tests among different population subgroups is vital for planning public health interventions with potential to increase screening uptake and reduce disparities in cancer morbidity and mortality. Overarching goals of Healthy People 2020 are to "achieve health equity, eliminate disparities, and improve the health of all groups." Adjusted findings for 2015, compared with previous years, show persistent screening disparities, particularly among the uninsured, and progress for colorectal cancer screening only.
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.