Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30915656›Full record

SynthesisDigestive diseases and sciences2019

Mailed Outreach Is Superior to Usual Care Alone for Colorectal Cancer Screening in the USA: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Mark Jager, Josh Demb, Ali Asghar, Kevin Selby, Evelyn Marquez Mello, Karen M Heskett, Alicea J Lieberman, Zhuo Geng, Balambal Bharti, Siddharth Singh and 1 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05903885 (Using a Cross-sectional Partnership to Improve Prevention and Health Equity Among African Americans), which is not on this map. Cited by 65 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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.

NCT05903885 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Using a Cross-sectional Partnership to Improve Prevention and Health Equity Among African Americans

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of NebraskaRan2023 to 2026Enrolled1,200ConditionsColorectal Cancer, PreventionArmsOn-site Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) Kit Distribution, On-site With Social Media Advertising Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) Kit Distribution
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

65 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 95 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Advancing equity and value in United States healthcare: an umbrella review.International journal for equity in health · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Video brochures in a mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach program provide cancer screening information in a user-friendly format for rural Appalachian community members.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2024
    Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Randomized Controlled Trial of Advance Notification Phone Calls vs Text Messages Prior to Mailed Fecal Test Outreach.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2021
    Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

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

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

11 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Mark JagerSan Diego State University, San Diego, USA.
Josh DembDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of California San Diego, San Diego, USA.
Ali AsgharDepartment of Medicine, University of California San Diego, San Diego, USA.
Kevin SelbyDepartment of Ambulatory Care and Community Medicine, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, USA.
Evelyn Marquez MelloKaiser Permanente, Panorama City, USA.
Karen M HeskettUniversity of California San Diego Library, San Diego, USA.
Alicea J LiebermanRady School of Management, University of San Diego, San Diego, USA.
Zhuo GengDivision of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA.
Balambal BhartiMoores Cancer Center, UC San Diego, San Diego, USA.
Siddharth SinghDivision of Gastroenterology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, USA.
Samir GuptaMoores Cancer Center, UC San Diego, San Diego, USA. s1gupta@ucsd.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-4192-5002
University of California San Diego · USUC San Diego Health System · USKaiser Permanente · USSan Diego Public Library · USSan Diego State University · USUniversity of Minnesota · USUniversity of San Diego · US

Funding

Research Education CoreU54CA132384 · NCI · SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI CRIPPS, RICHARD MATTHEW, CROWE, SHEILA E. · 2008 to 2022
$20.7M
Research Education CoreU54CA132379 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI ARREDONDO, ELVA M, CROWE, SHEILA E. · 2008 to 2021
$16.1M
Training Grant in GastroenterologyT32DK007202 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI GHOSH, PRADIPTA · 1985 to 2022
$7.7M
Post-polypectomy Surveillance for Reducing Colon Cancer Incidence and MortalityR37CA222866 · NCI · VETERANS MEDICAL RESEARCH FDN/SAN DIEGO · PI GUPTA, SAMIR · 2018 to 2023
$3.3M
Comparative Risks and Benefits of Pharmacological Therapies for Older Patients with Inflammatory Bowel DiseasesK23DK117058 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI SINGH, SIDDHARTH · 2018 to 2022
$971k
Colonoscopy in young onset colorectal cancerF32CA239360 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI DEMB, JOSHUA BRIAN · 2019 to 2022
$227k
Optimizing Colorectal Cancer and Polyp Surveillance after Colorectal PolypectomyI01HX001574 · VA · VA SAN DIEGO HEALTHCARE SYSTEM · PI GUPTA, SAMIR · 2015 to 2019
–
HSRD VA I01 HX001574NCI NIH HHS F32 CA239360NCI NIH HHS R37 CA222866NCI NIH HHS U54 CA132379NCI NIH HHS U54 CA132384NIDDK NIH HHS K23 DK117058NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK007202
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mailed outreach promoting colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with a stool blood test kit may increase participation, but magnitude and consistency of benefit of this intervention strategy is uncertain. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing mailed outreach offering stool tests to usual care, clinic-based screening offers on CRC screening uptake in the USA. We performed a systematic literature search of five databases for RCTs of mailed outreach from January 1980 through June 2017. Primary outcome was screening completion, summarized using random-effects meta-analysis as pooled differences in proportion completing the screening and relative risk of achieving screening compared to control. Subgroup analyses by test type offered-fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT), the presence of telephone reminders, and the presence of predominant underserved/minority population within study were performed. Quality of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE framework. Seven RCTs which enrolled 12,501 subjects were included (n = 5703 assigned mailed outreach and n = 6798 usual care). Mailed outreach resulted in a 28% absolute (95% CI 25-30%; I

Indexed as

Correspondence as TopicEarly Detection of CancerColorectal NeoplasmsHealth PromotionHumansImmunochemistryMarketing of Health ServicesOccult BloodPatient Acceptance of Health CarePostal ServiceRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicUnited StatesCancer screeningColorectal cancerMeta-analysesSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID30915656
PMCPMC6706307
OpenAlexW2924747820

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.