ArticleEuropean journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990)2018
Uptake of the English Bowel (Colorectal) Cancer Screening Programme: an update 5 years after the full roll-out.
Article in European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05609396 (Interventions to Improve Bowel Cancer Screening Uptake in Ireland), which is not on this map. Cited by 36 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.
Interventions to Improve Bowel Cancer Screening Uptake in Ireland: a 2x2 Factorial Trial
Who cites it
36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Attributes Used for Cancer Screening Discrete Choice Experiments: A Systematic Review.The patient · 2022Pooled it
- Testing feedback and social norms messages to increase participation: the BESTcc randomised controlled trial among non-respondents in population-based colorectal cancer screening programmes in Tuscany.SSM - population health · 2026Article
- Survey on changes in colorectal cancer screening participation at Minamisoma city after the Great East Japan earthquake using clustering analysis.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Colorectal Cancer Screening and Mortality Trends in the United States Over 25 Years: A Story of Success and Inequity.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Trends over 48 years in a one-number index of survival for all cancers combined, England and Wales (1971-2018): a population-based registry study.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2025Article
- Article
- Editorial: The impact of primary care on cancer screening program performance: strategies to increase uptake and effectiveness.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Public acceptability and anticipated uptake of risk-stratified bowel cancer screening in the UK: An online survey.Preventive medicine reports · 2024Article
- Effectiveness of tailored talks between a cancer screening specialist and general practitioners to improve the uptake of colorectal cancer screening in Ancona (Italy) during the pandemic period.The European journal of general practice · 2024Article
- 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
- Inequalities in cancer screening participation between adults with and without severe mental illness: results from a cross-sectional analysis of primary care data on English Screening Programmes.British journal of cancer · 2023Article
- Inequalities in colorectal cancer screening uptake in Wales: an examination of the impact of the temporary suspension of the screening programme during the COVID-19 pandemic.BMC public health · 2023Article
- A novel blood based triage test for colorectal cancer in primary care: a pilot study.BJGP open · 2023Article
- Small-Area Geographic and Socioeconomic Inequalities in Colorectal Cancer in Cyprus.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Integrating genome-wide polygenic risk scores and non-genetic risk to predict colorectal cancer diagnosis using UK Biobank data: population based cohort study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2022Article
- Evaluation of the Call for a Kit intervention to increase bowel cancer screening uptake in Lancashire, England.Journal of medical screening · 2022Article
- Urban density differences in colorectal cancer screening participation and screening yield in The Netherlands.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Colorectal cancer outcomes determined by mode of presentation: analysis of population data in England between 2010 and 2014.Techniques in coloproctology · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe initial roll-out of the English Bowel (Colorectal) Cancer Screening programme, during 2006 and 2009, found uptake to be low (54%) and socially graded. The current analysis used data from 2010 to 2015 to test whether uptake is increasing and becoming less socially graded over time.
methodsPostcode-derived area-level uptake of 4.4 million first-time invitees, stratified by gender and the year of the first invitation (2010-2015), was generated using the National Bowel Cancer Screening System. Data were limited to people aged 60-64 years. Binomial regression tested for variations in uptake by the year of invitation, gender, region, area-based socio-economic deprivation and area-based ethnic diversity.
resultsOverall, the first-time colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake across 6 years was 52% (n = 2,285,996/4,423,734) with a decline between 2010 and 2015 (53%, 54%, 52%, 50%, 49%, 49% respectively). Uptake continued to be socially graded between the most and the least deprived area-level socio-economic deprivation quintiles (43% vs 57%), the most and the least area-based ethnic diversity quintiles (41% vs 56%) and men and women (47% vs 56%). Multivariate analysis demonstrated the effects of year, deprivation, ethnicity and gender on uptake. The effect of deprivation was more pronounced in the most deprived area quintile between men and women (40% vs 47%) than the least deprived area quintile (52% vs 62% respectively).
conclusionWe did not find evidence of change in uptake patterns in CRC screening since its initial launch 10 years ago. The programme is unlikely to realise its full public health benefits and is en route to widening inequalities in CRC outcomes.
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.