Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30813110›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Impact of a mass media campaign on participation rates in a National Bowel Cancer Screening Program: a field experiment.

Sarah J Durkin, Kate Broun, Matthew J Spittal, Melanie A Wakefield

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The Co-Design of an Evidence-Based Health Education Strategy to Improve Bowel Cancer Awareness and Screening in a Remote Tasmanian Community: Lessons Learned.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Barriers and facilitators to participation in breast, bowel and cervical cancer screening in rural Victoria: A qualitative study.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2022
    Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sarah J DurkinCentre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2795-6454
Kate BrounPrevention Division, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Matthew J SpittalMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Melanie A WakefieldCentre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
The University of Melbourne · AUCancer Council Victoria · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

OBJECTIVES AND

designThis field experiment aimed to compare bowel cancer screening participation rates prior to, during and after a mass media campaign promoting screening, and the extent to which a higher intensity campaign in one state led to higher screening rates compared with another state that received lower intensity campaign exposure.

interventionAn 8-week television-led mass media campaign was launched in selected regions of Australia in mid-2014 to promote Australia's National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) that posts out immunochemical faecal occult blood test (iFOBT) kits to the homes of age-eligible people. The campaign used paid 30-second television advertising in the entire state of Queensland but not at all in Western Australia. Other supportive campaign elements had national exposure, including print, 4-minute television advertorials, digital and online advertising. OUTCOME MEASURES: Monthly kit return and invite data from NBCSP (January 2012 to December 2014). Return rates were determined as completed kits returned for analysis out of the number of people invited to do the iFOBT test in the current and past 3 months in each state.

resultsAnalyses adjusted for seasonality and the influence of other national campaigns. The number of kits returned for analysis increased in Queensland (adjusted rate ratio 20%, 95% CI 1.06% to 1.35%, p<0.01) during the months of the campaign and up to 2 months after broadcast, but only showed a tendency to increase in Western Australia (adjusted rate ratio 11%, 95% CI 0.99% to 1.24%, p=0.087).

conclusionsThe higher intensity 8-week television-led campaign in Queensland increased the rate of kits returned for analysis in Queensland, whereas there were marginal effects for the low intensity campaign elements in Western Australia. The low levels of participation in Australia's NBCSP could be increased by national mass media campaigns, especially those led by higher intensity paid television advertising.

Indexed as

Mass MediaAdvertisingAgedAustraliaColorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHealth PromotionHumansImmunochemistryMaleMiddle AgedOccult BloodPatient ParticipationQueenslandTelevisionAustraliabowel cancerfaecal occult blood testmass mediapublic educationscreening

Identifiers

PMID30813110
PMCPMC6347911
OpenAlexW2913841032

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.