ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2020
Associations of sociodemographic and clinical factors with gastrointestinal cancer risk assessment appointment completion.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Age-Period-Cohort Analysis on the Burden of Gastrointestinal Cancers in China: Trends, Risk Factors, and Predictions.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Pilot implementation study of a default genetic referral process for patients with early-onset colorectal cancer.Genetics in medicine open · 2025Article
- Patient accessibility and utilization of behavioral sleep medicine referrals in an academic center.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2024Article
- Racial, Ethnic, and Sex-based Disparities among High-risk Individuals Undergoing Pancreatic Cancer Surveillance.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2023Article
- Comparing telemedicine and in-person gastrointestinal cancer genetic appointment outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic.Hereditary cancer in clinical practice · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Cancer risk assessment services are important for patient care; effective use requires appropriate provider referral, accurate scheduling processes, and completed attendance at booked appointments. Sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with gastrointestinal cancer (GIC)-specific risk assessment appointments remain unstudied; therefore, we aimed to identify factors associated with appointment completion in a GIC risk assessment program at a tertiary academic center. Retrospective chart review was conducted on all patients scheduled for an appointment in the Gastrointestinal Cancer Risk Evaluation Program (GI-CREP) between January 2016 and December 2017. Data collected included demographic and clinical factors. Chi-square and Wilcoxon's rank-sum tests compared variables among patients based on the study outcome of whether a GI-CREP appointment was completed; marginal standardization was used to predict the standardized percentage of patients that had appointment completion. A total of 676 patients had a scheduled GI-CREP appointment; 32 individuals were excluded due to incomplete information or scheduling error, resulting in 644 patients available for final analysis. Our study population was predominantly female (61%), White (77%), and married (64%), had private healthcare insurance (76%), and lacked a personal history of cancer (60%). Referrals internal to the healthcare system were most common (77%), with gastroenterologists as the most frequent referring provider (42%). Seventy-five percent of scheduled individuals had appointment completion, while 25% of individuals did not. Independent predictors for an incomplete GI-CREP appointment included Medicaid insurance (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.21-4.28, p = .01), self-identified Black race (OR 1.97, 95% CI: 1.20-3.25, p = .008), and personal history of cancer (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.11-2.31, p = .01). These data highlight existing disparities in GIC risk assessment appointment completion associated with race, health insurance coverage, and medical status. Further studies of these areas are necessary to ensure equitable access to important GIC risk assessment services.
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.