ArticlePreventive medicine reports2020
The association between health literacy and colorectal cancer screening uptake in a publicly funded screening program in Denmark: Cross-sectional study.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Association Between Health Literacy and Colorectal Cancer Screening: Findings Using a Three-Question Health Literacy Measure.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2025Article
- The association between health literacy and cancer screening participation: A cross-sectional study across three organised screening programmes in Denmark.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- Perceptions and Attitudes Toward Utilizing a Non-Invasive Biomarker for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Qualitative Study.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Perspectives of international experts and the Danish citizens on the 'relevant knowledge' that citizens need for making informed choices about participation in cancer screening: Qualitative study.Patient education and counseling · 2025Article
- Article
- Racial and sociodemographic distribution of colorectal cancer screening in Canada: A cross-sectional study.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2024Article
- Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening Literacy and Facilitators Related to a Free Screening Program in Thailand.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2023Article
- Colorectal cancer screening: understanding the needs of the pre-screening group.Central European journal of public health · 2023Article
- Association between health literacy, general psychological factors, and adherence to medical treatment among Danes aged 50-80 years.BMC geriatrics · 2021Article
- Motives for non-adherence to colonoscopy advice after a positive colorectal cancer screening test result: a qualitative study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2020Article
- Relationship between Health Literacy and Knowledge, Attitude, and Performance Regarding Cancer Warning Signs.Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are multiple reasons for not participating in colorectal cancer screening, but the role of health literacy in screening uptake is not well understood. The aims of this study were to determine the association between health literacy and colorectal cancer screening uptake and to explore whether socioeconomic and -demographic characteristics and worry and attitude variables modify this association. In a cross-sectional study, 10,030 53-74-year-old randomly selected citizens resident in Central Denmark Region received a questionnaire assessing health literacy using the European Health Literacy Survey Short Scale 16-item. Data on colorectal cancer screening uptake were obtained from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Screening database, and socioeconomic and -demographic data were linked from Statistics Denmark. The response rate was 71% (n = 7142). Odds ratio (OR) for uptake was 1.06 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.96, 1.19) for problematic health literacy and 1.00 (95% CI: 0.87, 1.16) for inadequate health literacy, when using adequate health literacy as the reference value. The association was not modified by socioeconomic or -demographic characteristics, worry or attitude. No association was found between health literacy and colorectal cancer screening uptake. Future research needs to clarify which dimensions of health literacy may predict screening uptake and how it is best measured.
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.