ArticleGut and liver2020
Increase in the Colorectal Cancer Screening Rate by a Round-Mailed Fecal Immunochemical Testing Kit and Associated Factors in Underserved Regions of Korea: A Community-Based Intervention Study.
Article in Gut and liver, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chasm between Public Perceptions and Epidemiological Data on Colorectal Cancer.Gut and liver · 2023Article
- Trends of Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates in Korea: Korean National Cancer Screening Survey 2005-2020.Gut and liver · 2022Article
- Trends in Cancer Screening Rates among Korean Men and Women: Results of the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey, 2004-2018.Cancer research and treatment · 2021Article
- Factors Associated with Participation in Stool Based Colorectal Screening in Brunei Darussalam.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2020Article
- Strategies to Increase the Participation Rate of Colorectal Cancer Screening.Gut and liver · 2020Article
- Adapting to telemedicine in the COVID-19 era: Feasibility of dried blood spot testing for hemoglobin A1c.Diabetes & metabolic syndromeArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Aims: Postal distribution of a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kit has been recommended as an effective method of increasing participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The present study was performed to assess the impact of the round-mailed FIT kit on screening participation in underserved regions of Korea and to identify factors related to nonparticipation. Methods: Residents were recruited from three rural regions of Korea that lack screening units for the National Cancer Screening Program. A package containing a FIT kit for stool self-sampling and a return envelope addressed to the local health center was postally distributed to each subject. Thirty days after the kits were mailed, nonresponders were reminded via telephone as the second intervention. The participation rates and odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each intervention response were calculated to evaluate the effect of the interventions and factors related to screening participation in response to the interventions. Results: CRC screening participation rates increased from 24.5% (95% CI, 21.6% to 27.4%) to 42.6% (95% CI, 39.3% to 46.0%) as a result of postal screening and increased further to 51.4% (95% CI, 48.0% to 54.9%) after the telephone reminder. After controlling for the sex, age, and household type of each subject, factors associated with poor response to postal screening were identified as low educational attainment and poor previous participation in the National Cancer Screening Program. Conclusions: Round-mailed FIT kits with phone call reminders were an effective intervention, nearly doubling the screening rate in underserved regions of Korea.
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.