Trial reportCancer2019
Follow-up approaches to a health literacy intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening in rural community clinics: A randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions for improving health literacy in migrants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Cancer screening educational interventions in rural and farmworker communities: a systematic literature review.Ethnicity & health · 2023Pooled it
- Motivational Interviewing to Improve the Uptake of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Interventions for increasing colorectal cancer screening uptake among African-American men: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2020Pooled it
- Social determinants of health and US cancer screening interventions: A systematic review.CA: a cancer journal for cliniciansPooled it
- Trial
- Repeat Annual Colorectal Cancer Screening in Rural Community Clinics: A Randomized Clinical Trial to Evaluate Outreach Strategies to Sustain Screening.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2020Trial
- A Low Literacy, Multimedia Health Information Technology Intervention to Enhance Patient-Centered Cancer Care in Safety Net Settings Increased Cancer Knowledge in a Randomized Controlled Trial.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterTrial
- Interventions to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake in Rural Settings: A Scoping Review.Preventing chronic disease · 2025Article
- The Association Between Health Literacy and Colorectal Cancer Screening: Findings Using a Three-Question Health Literacy Measure.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2025Article
- Colorectal cancer screening: The value of early detection and modern challenges.World journal of gastroenterology · 2024Review
- Colon Cancer Disparities in Stage at Presentation and Time to Surgery for Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders: A Study with Disaggregated Ethnic Groups.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- Cancer-Specific health equity metrics in the United States of America: A scoping review.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Design of a randomized controlled trial to assess the comparative effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention to improve three-year adherence to colorectal cancer screening among patients cared for in rural community health centers.Contemporary clinical trials · 2022Article
- Health Literacy Research in Rural Areas.Studies in health technology and informatics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSignificant disparities exist in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates among those of low socioeconomic status, with fewer years of education, lacking health insurance, or living in rural areas.
methodsA randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare the effectiveness of 2 follow-up approaches to a health literacy intervention to improve CRC screening: automated telephone call or personal call. Patients aged 50 to 75 years residing in 4 rural community clinics in Louisiana were given a structured interview that assessed demographic, health literacy and CRC screening barriers, knowledge, and attitudes. All were given health literacy-informed CRC education, a patient-friendly CRC screening pamphlet, simplified fecal immunochemical test (FIT) instructions, and a FIT kit, and a "teach-back" method was used to confirm understanding. Patients were randomized to 1 of 2 telephone follow-up arms. If they did not mail their FIT kit within 4 weeks, they received a reminder call and were called again at 8 weeks if the test still was not received.
resultsA total of 620 patients were enrolled. Approximately 55% were female, 66% were African American, and 40% had limited literacy. The overall FIT completion rate was 68%: 69.2% in the automated telephone call arm and 67% in the personal call arm. Greater than one-half of the patients (range, 58%-60%) returned the FIT kit without receiving a telephone call. There was no difference noted with regard to the effectiveness of the follow-up calls; each increased the return rate by 9%.
conclusionsProviding FIT kits and literacy-appropriate education at regularly scheduled clinic visits with a follow-up telephone call when needed was found to increase CRC screening among low-income, rural patients. The lower cost automated call was just as effective as the personal call.
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.