ArticlePloS one2019
Geospatial analysis of the influence of family doctor on colorectal cancer screening adherence.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Geographical Disparities in Faecal Immunochemical Test-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Participation and Positivity Rates: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026Pooled it
- Multilevel factors influencing colorectal cancer screening adherence: A systematic literature review.PloS one · 2026Pooled it
- Area-Level Determinants in Colorectal Cancer Spatial Clustering Studies: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- Inter-physician heterogeneity in colorectal cancer screening participation in France: a study based on the French National Health Data System.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Article
- Breast cancer screening among individuals with a substance use disorder: a retrospective cohort study.Family practice · 2025Article
- The impact of individual and contextual socioeconomic factors on colorectal cancer screening adherence in Turin, Italy: a multilevel analysis.BMC public health · 2025Observational
- Language as a barrier to colorectal cancer screening in flanders: an ecological study.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Article
- Geospatial distribution of the adoption of dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitors for type 2 diabetes among Medicare beneficiaries.Spatial and spatio-temporal epidemiology · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of tailored talks between a cancer screening specialist and general practitioners to improve the uptake of colorectal cancer screening in Ancona (Italy) during the pandemic period.The European journal of general practice · 2024Article
- Quantifying the Impact of Family Doctors on the Care Experiences of Patients with Cancer: Exploring Evidence from the 2021 Ambulatory Oncology Patient Satisfaction Survey in Alberta, Canada.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Spatial Insights for Understanding Colorectal Cancer Screening in Disproportionately Affected Populations, Central Texas, 2019.Preventing chronic disease · 2021Article
- Addressing Cancer Screening Inequities by Promoting Cancer Prevention Knowledge, Awareness, Self-Efficacy, and Screening Uptake Among Low-Income and Illiterate Immigrant Women in France.International journal of public health · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the well-recognised relevance of screening in colorectal cancer (CRC) control, adherence to screening is often suboptimal. Improving adherence represents an important public health strategy. We investigated the influence of family doctors (FDs) as determinant of CRC screening adherence by comparing each FDs practice participation probability to that of the residents in the same geographic areas using the whole population geocoded.
methodsWe used multilevel logistic regression model to investigate factors associated with CRC screening adherence, among 333,843 people at their first screening invitation. Standardized Adherence Rates (SAR) by age, gender, and socioeconomic status were calculated comparing FDs practices to the residents in the same geographic areas using geocoded target population.
resultsScreening adherence increased from 41.0% (95% CI, 40.8-41.2) in 2006-2008 to 44.7% (95% CI, 44.5-44.9) in 2011-2012. Males, the most deprived and foreign-born people showed low adherence. FD practices and the percentage of foreign-born people in a practice were significant clustering factors. SAR for 145 (21.4%) FDs practices differed significantly from people living in the same areas. Predicted probabilities of adherence were 31.7% and 49.0% for FDs with low and high adherence, respectively. DISCUSSION: FDs showed a direct and independent effect to the CRC screening adherence of the people living in their practice. FDs with significantly high adherence level could be the key to adherence improvement. IMPACT: Most deprived individuals and foreigners represent relevant targets for interventions in public health aimed to improve CRC screening adherence.
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.