ArticleMMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report2020
Vital Signs: Colorectal Cancer Screening Test Use - United States, 2018.
Article in MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 132 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
132 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 210 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic Review: Recommendations of Levels of Physical Activity among Colorectal Cancer Patients (2010-2019).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- Race, ethnicity, and prior colorectal screening test use in CONFIRM colonoscopy vs fecal immunochemical testing trial participants.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2026Trial
- Behavioral Interventions Improve Mailed Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Overdue Patients in a Randomized Trial.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2026Trial
- Centralized Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach in Federally Qualified Health Centers: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2024Trial
- Recruitment strategies and consent rates in a national prospective colorectal cancer screening cohort: results from year 1 of the Voyage Study.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2024Trial
- The COMPASS study: A prospective, randomized, multi-center trial testing the impact of a clinic-based intervention informing patients of colorectal cancer screening options on screening completion.Contemporary clinical trials · 2022Trial
- The Impact of 4 Risk Communication Interventions on Cancer Screening Preferences and Knowledge.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022Trial
- A stepped randomized trial to promote colorectal cancer screening in a nationwide sample of U.S. Veterans.Contemporary clinical trials · 2021Trial
- Article
- Factors Associated with Ever Undergoing Colorectal Cancer Testing Among Adults in the United States.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- An Evidence-Based Approach to Bridging Healthcare Disparities for Gastroenterological Diseases.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Article
- The efficacy of colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Preventive medicine reports · 2026Review
- Disparities in Access to Gastrointestinal Care in the United States.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Review
- Longitudinal Adherence With Stool-Based Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Four United States Health Systems.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2026Article
- From mono- to multi-cellularFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Stool-based SDC2/SFRP2/TFPI2 methylation assay for colorectal neoplasia screening: a multicenter, case-control study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Evaluating the impact of health equity zones to mitigate disparities in cancer screening: study of colorectal cancer screening in rhode island.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Article
- From planning to savings: CRC screening organization and cost-utility analysis of early CRC detection in Bulgaria.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Article
- From biomarker to clinical utility: translating the advanced lung cancer inflammation index into a machine learning-driven risk stratification tool for colorectal cancer.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Age-Based Screening for Lung Cancer Surveillance in the US.JAMA network open · 2025Article
72 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States of cancers that affect both men and women. Despite strong evidence that screening for CRC reduces incidence and mortality, CRC screening prevalence is below the national target. This report describes current CRC screening prevalence by age, various demographic factors, and state.
methodsData from the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey were analyzed to estimate the percentages of adults aged 50-75 years who reported CRC screening consistent with the United States Preventive Services Task Force recommendation.
resultsIn 2018, 68.8% of adults were up to date with CRC screening. The percentage up to date was 79.2% among respondents aged 65-75 years and 63.3% among those aged 50-64 years. CRC screening prevalence was lowest among persons aged 50-54 years (50.0%) and increased with age. Among respondents aged 50-64 years, CRC screening prevalence was lowest among persons without health insurance (32.6%) and highest among those with reported annual household income of ≥$75,000 (70.8%). Among respondents aged 65-75 years, CRC screening prevalence was lowest among those without a regular health care provider (45.6%), and highest among those with reported annual household income ≥$75,000 (87.1%). Among states, CRC screening prevalence was highest in Massachusetts (76.5%) and lowest in Wyoming (57.8%). DISCUSSION: CRC screening prevalence is lower among adults aged 50-64 years, although most reported having a health care provider and health insurance. Concerted efforts are needed to inform persons aged <50 years about the benefit of screening so that screening can start at age 50 years.
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.