ArticleEuropean journal of cancer care2021
A qualitative evaluation of the impact of a training programme on colorectal cancer risk reduction for Specialist Screening Practitioners on health promotion, knowledge and practice.
Article in European journal of cancer care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring cancer knowledge and sources of information among the public: An analytical study.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Survey on Mental Health Status and Quality of Life and Correlation among Patients with Permanent Stoma of Colorectal Tumor.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveColorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most common cancer in the UK. It is estimated that around 50% of the disease burden is caused by lifestyle factors. This paper evaluates the impact of a training programme for Specialist Screening Practitioners (SSPs) on knowledge of CRC risk reduction and subsequent health promotion activities.
methodAttendees (n = 21) were invited to participate in semi-structured qualitative telephone interviews developed in conjunction with programme organisers. An independent researcher undertook the interviews on the perceived impact of the training on knowledge about risk reduction, communicating health promotion messages and working practices.
resultsTen interviews were conducted. The programme was perceived to be successful in increasing knowledge about CRC risk and methods to promote behavioural change. Participants questioned the suitability of the endoscopy setting to communicate health promotion messages given patient anxiety pre-investigation and post-investigation elation after negative results. Key barriers to health promotion activities were time, hesitancy over raising issues that could not be easily discussed and scepticism about the ability of older adults to change their lifestyle.
conclusionsTraining on CRC risk reduction increased knowledge and behaviour change skills among SSPs. Further work is needed to explore opportunities to optimise the screening environment for health promotion activities.
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.