Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31352897›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2019

Patient perspectives on colorectal cancer screening and the role of general practice.

Lynsey J Brown, S Leigh Roeger, Richard L Reed

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Optimal Strategies for Colorectal Cancer Screening.Current treatment options in oncology · 2022
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lynsey J BrownTorrens University Australia, 88 Wakefield Street, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000, Australia. lynsey.brown@flinders.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0003-2379-4272
S Leigh RoegerCollege of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University of South Australia, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, South Australia, 5001, Australia.
Richard L ReedCollege of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University of South Australia, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, South Australia, 5001, Australia.
Flinders University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most frequent cause of cancer death in Australia. Early detection can reduce incidence and mortality. General practice-based initiatives have been proposed to improve CRC screening rates but to date have had modest impact. As there is limited research into the patient experience of CRC screening decision making, this study explored patient perspectives on CRC screening and the potential role for general practice.

methodsTen participants, aged between 50 and 74, from a general practice in South Australia were recruited by practice staff. Semi-structured interviews were conducted. Concurrent data collection and analysis were performed, guided by interpretative phenomenological analysis.

resultsTwo key themes were evident: attitudes toward screening and potential roles for general practice. Participants structured the experience of screening in terms of being proactive, ambivalent or avoidant. Roles for general practice centred on tasks as educators, trusted advisors, monitors and screeners. Mixed views on whether general practice involvement was necessary prompted consideration of additional sources of health information and motivation around screening.

conclusionsExploration of the patient experience provides insight into how participants make sense of screening and perceived roles for general practice (or other agents) in screening. There is satisfaction with current Government-driven processes but perceived value in general practice playing a complementary part in increasing screening rates. A multifaceted strategy, accounting for attitudes, is required to improve screening and population health outcomes.

Indexed as

General PracticeAgedAttitude to HealthColorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedSouth AustraliaBowel cancerCancer screeningColorectal cancerPatient-centred carePopulation screening

Identifiers

PMID31352897
PMCPMC6661764
OpenAlexW2964457581

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.