ArticlePreventive medicine reports2019
Outcomes associated with use of the
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Leveraging Health Information Technology to Collect Family Cancer History: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2021Pooled it
- Predicting breast cancer risk in a racially diverse, community-based sample of potentially high-risk women.Cancer medicine · 2022Article
- A scoping review of risk-stratified bowel screening: current evidence, future directions.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2022Article
- Challenges and Approaches to Measuring Repeat Fecal Immunochemical Test for Colorectal Cancer Screening.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 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
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite demonstrated primary and secondary prevention benefits, screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is sub-optimal. We implemented the
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.