ArticleJCO global oncology2020
Feasibility of Brigade-Style, Multiphasic Cancer Screening in Rural Honduras.
Article in JCO global oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Barriers to uptake of cervical cancer screening services in low-and-middle-income countries: a systematic review.BMC women's health · 2022Pooled it
- High Gastric Cancer Mortality and Years of Life Lost in Nicaragua: A Population-Based Study 1997 to 2012.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2024Article
- Living the best of both worlds: A personal scientific journey.FASEB bioAdvances · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the feasibility of brigade-style, multiphasic cancer screening in Honduras, exploring data from 3 screening events that each tested for multiple cancers on single occasions.
methodsThis series of 3 studies each used a single-arm, post-test-only design to explore the feasibility of implementing multiphasic, community-based cancer screening at the same rural location in 2013, 2016, and 2017. The 2013 event for women screened for 2 cancers (breast and cervix), and the 2016 event for women screened for 3 cancers (breast, cervix, and thyroid). The 2017 event for men screened for 5 cancers (skin, prostate, colorectal, oropharynx, and testes).
resultsTotals of 473 and 401 women participated in the 2013 and 2016 events, respectively, and 301 men participated in the 2017 event. Staffing for each event varied from 33 to 44 people and relied primarily on in-country medical students and local community members. High rates (mean, 88%) of compliance with referral for follow-up testing at clinics and primary care facilities were observed after the screening events.
conclusionThe multiphasic, community-based approach proved feasible for both women and men and resulted in high rates of compliance with follow-up testing. This approach appears highly replicable: it was conducted multiple times across the years with different screening targets, which could be further scaled elsewhere using the same technique.
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.