ArticlePloS one2020
Improving Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program outcomes through increased participation and cost-effective investment.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current status and challenges of colorectal cancer screening program in Guangzhou, China: a population-based study.Gastroenterology report · 2026Article
- Timing and Frequency of Surveillance Colonoscopies After Resection for Colorectal Cancer in Queensland, Australia: A Retrospective 10-Year Analysis.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025Article
- Participation in the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program by people with severe mental illness, Australia, 2006-2019: a national data linkage study.The Medical journal of Australia · 2024Article
- Article
- Spatial variability in socio-demographic factors affecting participation in the Australian national bowel cancer screening program.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- Potential global loss of life expected due to COVID-19 disruptions to organised colorectal cancer screening.EClinicalMedicine · 2023Article
- The Colonoscopy Cookbook: Analysis of effect of a recipe resource on quality and experience of bowel preparation in colonoscopy.Endoscopy international open · 2023Article
- Development and psychometric evaluation of the Aversion to Bowel Cancer Screening Scale.European journal of cancer care · 2022Article
- Reduced Cancer Screening Due to Lockdowns of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Reviewing Impacts and Ways to Counteract the Impacts.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
- Long-term benefits for lower socioeconomic groups by improving bowel screening participation in South Australia: A modelling study.PloS one · 2022Article
- The Future of Endoscopic Operations After the Coronavirus Pandemic.Gastrointestinal endoscopy clinics of North America · 2021Review
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on faecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening programmes in Australia, Canada, and the Netherlands: a comparative modelling study.The lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2021Article
- Health system costs and days in hospital for colorectal cancer patients in New South Wales, Australia.PloS one · 2021Article
- Pathways to a cancer-free future: a protocol for modelled evaluations to minimise the future burden of colorectal cancer in Australia.BMJ open · 2020Article
- A Novel Blood-Based Screening Test for Colorectal Cancer Using Raman Spectroscopy.ANZ journal of surgeryArticle
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) provides biennial immunochemical faecal occult blood test (iFOBT) screening for people aged 50-74 years. Previous work has quantified the number of colorectal cancer (CRC) deaths prevented by the NBCSP and has shown that it is cost-effective. With a 40% screening participation rate, the NBCSP is currently underutilised and could be improved by increasing program participation, but the maximum appropriate level of spending on effective interventions to increase adherence has not yet been quantified.
objectivesTo estimate (i) reductions in CRC cases and deaths for 2020-2040 attributable to, and (ii) the threshold for cost-effective investment (TCEI) in, effective future interventions to improve participation in the NBCSP.
methodsA comprehensive microsimulation model, Policy1-Bowel, was used to simulate CRC natural history and screening in Australia, considering currently reported NBCSP adherence rates, i.e. iFOBT participation (∼40%) and diagnostic colonoscopy assessment rates (∼70%). Australian residents aged 40-74 were modelled. We evaluated three scenarios: (1) diagnostic colonoscopy assessment increasing to 90%; (2) iFOBT screening participation increasing to 60% by 2020, 70% by 2030 with diagnostic assessment rates of 90%; and (3) iFOBT screening increasing to 90% by 2020 with diagnostic assessment rates of 90%. In each scenario, we estimated CRC incidence and mortality, colonoscopies, costs, and TCEI given indicative willingness-to-pay thresholds of AUD$10,000-$30,000/LYS.
resultsBy 2040, age-standardised CRC incidence and mortality rates could be reduced from 46.2 and 13.5 per 100,000 persons, respectively, if current participation rates continued, to (1) 44.0 and 12.7, (2) 36.8 and 8.8, and (3) 31.9 and 6.5. In Scenario 2, 23,000 lives would be saved from 2020-2040 vs current participation rates. The estimated scenario-specific TCEI (Australian dollars or AUD$/year) to invest in interventions to increase participation, given a conservative willingness-to-pay threshold of AUD$10,000/LYS, was (1) AUD$14.9M, (2) AUD$72.0M, and (3) AUD$76.5M.
conclusionSignificant investment in evidence-based interventions could be used to improve NBCSP adherence and help realise the program's potential. Such interventions might include mass media campaigns to increase program participation, educational or awareness interventions for practitioners, and/or interventions resulting in improvements in referral pathways. Any set of interventions which achieves at least 70% iFOBT screening participation and a 90% diagnostic assessment rate while costing under AUD$72 million annually would be highly cost-effective (<AUD$10,000/LYS) and save 23,000 additional lives from 2020-2040.
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.