Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32045616›Full record

ArticlePreventive medicine2020

Predictors of overall and test-specific colorectal Cancer screening adherence.

Constantine Daskalakis, Melissa DiCarlo, Sarah Hegarty, Anuragh Gudur, Sally W Vernon, Ronald E Myers

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Preventive medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Longitudinal adherence to surveillance for late effects of cancer treatment: a population-based study of adult survivors of childhood cancer.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Constantine DaskalakisThomas Jefferson University, Department of Pharmacology & Experimental Therapeutics, Division of Biostatistics, United States of America. Electronic address: constantine.daskalakis@jefferson.edu.
Melissa DiCarloThomas Jefferson University, Department of Medical Oncology, Division of Population Science, United States of America.
Sarah HegartyThomas Jefferson University, Department of Pharmacology & Experimental Therapeutics, Division of Biostatistics, United States of America.
Anuragh GudurDrexel University College of Medicine, United States of America.
Sally W VernonUniversity of Texas School of Public Health, Center for Health Promotion and Prevention Research, Division of Health Promotion and Behavioral Sciences, United States of America.
Ronald E MyersThomas Jefferson University, Department of Medical Oncology, Division of Population Science, United States of America.
Thomas Jefferson University · USDrexel University · US

Funding

Tailored Navigation in CRC ScreeningR01CA116576 · NCI · THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY · PI MYERS, RONALD E. · 2007 to 2010
$2.2M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA116576
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study investigated predictors of overall and test-specific colorectal cancer screening (CRCS). Stool blood test (SBT) and/or colonoscopy screening were offered to primary care patients in two randomized controlled trials which assessed the impact of behavioral interventions on screening. Data were obtained through surveys and electronic medical records. Among 1942 participants, 646 (33%) screened. Exposure to interventions was associated with higher overall CRCS by twofold to threefold; older age, African American race, being married, and having a higher screening decision stage were also associated with higher overall CRCS (odds ratios = 1.30, 1.31, 1.34, and 5.59, respectively). Intervention, older age, female gender, and being married were associated with higher SBT adherence, while preference for colonoscopy was associated with lower SBT adherence. Intervention and higher decision stage were associated with higher colonoscopy adherence, while preference for SBT was associated with lower colonoscopy adherence. Among older individuals, African Americans had higher overall CRCS than whites, but this was not true among younger individuals (interaction p = .041). The higher screening adherence of African Americans over whites was due to stronger screening with a non-preferred test, i.e., higher SBT adherence only among individuals who preferred colonoscopy and higher colonoscopy adherence only among individuals who preferred SBT. Intervention exposure, sociodemographic background, and screening decision stage predicted overall CRCS adherence. Gender and test preference also affected test-specific screening adherence. Interactions involving race and test preference suggest that it is important to provide both colonoscopy and SBT screening options to patients, particularly African Americans.

Identifiers

PMID32045616
PMCPMC7415480
OpenAlexW3005032219

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.