Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33122895›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2020

Preference and Experience of Colonic Examination for Participants Presenting to Hospitals with a Positive Fecal Immunochemical Test Result.

Takashi Kato, Koichi Nagata, Junta Yamamichi, Soichi Tanaka, Tetsuro Honda, Norihito Shimizu, Kenichi Utano, Michiaki Hirayama, Hiroshi Matsumoto, Shoichi Horita

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 83% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Takashi KatoDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hokkaido Gastroenterological Hospital, Sapporo, Japan.
Koichi NagataDepartment of Gastroenterology, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima, Japan.
Junta YamamichiDivision of Hematology, Respiratory Medicine and Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Saga University, Saga, Japan.
Soichi TanakaDepartment of Coloproctology, Matsuaikai Matsuda Hospital, Hamamatsu, Japan.
Tetsuro HondaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Nagasaki Harbor Medical Center, Nagasaki, Japan.
Norihito ShimizuDepartment of Radiology, Medical Corporation Matsuoka Clinic, Nara, Japan.
Kenichi UtanoDepartment of Coloproctology, Aizu Medical Center, Fukushima Medical University, Aizuwakamatsu, Fukushima, Japan.
Michiaki HirayamaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Tonan Hospital, Sapporo, Japan.
Hiroshi MatsumotoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Kawasaki Medical University School of Medicine, Kurashiki, Japan.
Shoichi HoritaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hokkaido Gastroenterological Hospital, Sapporo, Japan.
Fukushima Medical University · JPHokkaido hospital · JPKawasaki Medical School · JPNagasaki Medical Center · JPSaga University · JPTonan Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePatients who test positive on the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) for colorectal cancer (CRC) are referred for colonoscopy for further diagnostic evaluation. Colonoscopy is not a perfect method and may be a challenge for some FIT-positive patients. Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is an alternative method that is less invasive and allows examination of the whole colon. The study objective was to evaluate the preference of FIT-positive patients for either colonoscopy or CTC for CRC examination. PATIENTS AND

methodsIndividuals older than 40 years with a positive FIT test at eight Japanese hospitals between December 2012 and July 2015 were invited to participate. Participants were given detailed information regarding colonoscopy and CTC before deciding on either examination. They completed questionnaires before the procedure regarding their preference and after the procedure regarding their experience.

resultsThe pre- and post-questionnaires of 846 and 834 participants, respectively, were analyzed. Participants preferred colonoscopy over CTC (colonoscopy, 72%; CTC, 28%). The possibility of obtaining biopsy samples and removing colorectal polyps during the procedure was the main reason for colonoscopy selection. Patients selected CTC to reduce discomfort but reported that CTC bowel preparation was more burdensome than colonoscopy bowel preparation. The overall experience of the examination did not differ between the groups.

conclusionColonoscopy is the standard examination for FIT-positive patients. However, when given a choice, almost one-third of participants chose CTC because they thought it would be a more "comfortable" examination. Clinicians should therefore be aware of patients' potential preference for noninvasive colorectal examinations.

Indexed as

colonoscopycomputed tomographic colonographyfecal immunochemical testpatient preference

Identifiers

PMID33122895
PMCPMC7588835
OpenAlexW3094292400

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.