Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30326005›Full record

SynthesisJAMA internal medicine2018

Evaluation of Interventions Intended to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Michael K Dougherty, Alison T Brenner, Seth D Crockett, Shivani Gupta, Stephanie B Wheeler, Manny Coker-Schwimmer, Laura Cubillos, Teri Malo, Daniel S Reuland

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JAMA internal medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 220 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
220citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
–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.

NCT07261059 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Artificial Intelligence-assisted Integrated Care to Promote Colonoscopy Uptake in China: a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorFudan UniversityRan2025 to 2026Enrolled400ConditionsColorectal Neoplasms, ColonoscopyArmsAI-assisted integrated care
NCT07612436 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

AI-empowered Nudge to Improve Colonoscopy Uptake (AINC): A Pragmatic Cluster-Randomized Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorFudan UniversityRan2026 to 2027Enrolled1,680ConditionsColorectal Neoplasms, ColonoscopyArmsAI-empowered nudge (AINC) strategy, Usual Care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

220 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Primary and Secondary Prevention Interventions to Reduce Risk Factors Associated with Colorectal Cancer in High-Risk Groups: a Systematic Literature Review.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2023
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Barriers and Facilitators to Participation in Health Screening: an Umbrella Review Across Conditions.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2022
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Behavioral Interventions Improve Mailed Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Overdue Patients in a Randomized Trial.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2026
    Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

160 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Michael K DoughertyDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Alison T BrennerCecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Seth D CrockettDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Shivani GuptaDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York.
Stephanie B WheelerCecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Manny Coker-SchwimmerCecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Laura CubillosCecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Teri MaloLineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Daniel S ReulandCecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Funding

Virology Research Program (Program 4)P30CA016086 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Deborah F. Tate · 1985 to 2026
$201.5M
DIGESTIVE DISEASES EPIDEMIOLOGY TRAINING PROGRAMT32DK007634 · NIDDK · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI ROBERT S. SANDLER · 1990 to 2026
$7.4M
North Carolina Translational & Clinical Sciences Institute (NC TraCS)KL2TR001109 · NCATS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BUSE, JOHN BERNARD, CAREY, TIMOTHY S · 2013 to 2017
$5.7M
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR001109NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016086NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK007634
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Colorectal cancer screening (CRC) is recommended by all major US medical organizations but remains underused. Objective: To identify interventions associated with increasing CRC screening rates and their effect sizes. Data Sources: PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from January 1, 1996, to August 31, 2017. Key search terms included colorectal cancer and screening. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials of US-based interventions in clinical settings designed to improve CRC screening test completion in average-risk adults. Data Extraction and Synthesis: At least 2 investigators independently extracted data and appraised each study's risk of bias. Where sufficient data were available, random-effects meta-analysis was used to obtain either a pooled risk ratio (RR) or risk difference (RD) for screening completion for each type of intervention. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was completion of CRC screening. Examination included interventions to increase completion of (1) initial CRC screening by any recommended modality, (2) colonoscopy after an abnormal initial screening test result, and (3) continued rounds of annual fecal blood tests (FBTs). Results: The main review included 73 randomized clinical trials comprising 366 766 patients at low or medium risk of bias. Interventions that were associated with increased CRC screening completion rates compared with usual care included FBT outreach (RR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.81-2.81; RD, 22%; 95% CI, 17%-27%), patient navigation (RR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.64-2.46; RD, 18%; 95% CI, 13%-23%), patient education (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.06-1.36; RD, 4%; 95% CI, 1%-6%), patient reminders (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.02-1.41; RD, 3%; 95% CI, 0%-5%), clinician interventions of academic detailing (RD, 10%; 95% CI, 3%-17%), and clinician reminders (RD, 13%; 95% CI, 8%-19%). Combinations of interventions (clinician interventions or navigation added to FBT outreach) were associated with greater increases than single components (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.09-1.29; RD, 7%; 95% CI, 3%-11%). Repeated mailed FBTs with navigation were associated with increased annual FBT completion (RR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.91-2.29; RD, 39%; 95% CI, 29%-49%). Patient navigation was not associated with colonoscopy completion after an initial abnormal screening test result (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.92-1.60; RD, 14%; 95% CI, 0%-29%). Conclusions and Relevance: Fecal blood test outreach and patient navigation, particularly in the context of multicomponent interventions, were associated with increased CRC screening rates in US trials. Fecal blood test outreach should be incorporated into population-based screening programs. More research is needed on interventions to increase adherence to continued FBTs, follow-up of abnormal initial screening test results, and cost-effectiveness and other implementation barriers for more intensive interventions, such as navigation.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerColorectal NeoplasmsHumansUnited States

Identifiers

PMID30326005
PMCPMC6583619

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.