Trial reportThe Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association2020
Repeat Annual Colorectal Cancer Screening in Rural Community Clinics: A Randomized Clinical Trial to Evaluate Outreach Strategies to Sustain Screening.
Trial report in The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Interventions to improve access to cancer care in underserved populations in high income countries: a systematic review.Oncology reviews · 2024Pooled 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
- Comparative effectiveness of two interventions to increase colorectal cancer screening among females living in the rural Midwest.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Interventions to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake in Rural Settings: A Scoping Review.Preventing chronic disease · 2025Article
- Exploring 6 years of colorectal cancer surgery in rural Italy: insights from 648 consecutive patients unveiling successes and challenges.Updates in surgery · 2024Article
- 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
- Closing the Gap: A Resident-Led Quality Improvement Project to Improve Colorectal Cancer Screening in Primary Care Community Clinics.Journal of graduate medical education · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe majority of colorectal cancer (CRC) research using the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) has studied short-term screening results in predominantly urban areas. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of 2 outreach strategies embedded in a health literacy intervention on repeat CRC screening in rural community clinics.
methodsA 2-arm randomized controlled trial was conducted in 4 rural clinics in Louisiana. During a regularly scheduled clinic visit, participants ages 50-75 received a FIT kit and brief educational intervention. Participants were randomized to receive an automated call or a personal call by a prevention counselor after 4 weeks and 8 weeks if FIT kits were not returned. In year 2, materials were mailed, and follow-up calls were conducted as in year 1. The primary outcome was repeat FIT-the return of the FIT kit in both years.
participantsOf 568 eligible participants, 55% were female, 67% were African American, and 39% had low health literacy.
findingsRepeat FIT rates were 36.5% for those receiving the automated call and 33.6% for those receiving a personal call (P = .30). No annual FITs were returned in 30% of participants, while only 1 FIT was returned by 35% of participants (31% only year 1 and 4% only year 2).
conclusionSustaining CRC screening with FIT is challenging in rural clinics. A lower cost automated call was just as effective as the personal call in promoting repeat annual screening. However, more intensive strategies are needed to improve long-term FIT screening among rural participants.
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.