Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33144285›Full record

ReviewCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2021

Black and White Differences in Colorectal Cancer Screening and Screening Outcomes: A Narrative Review.

Carolyn M Rutter, Amy B Knudsen, Jennifer S Lin, Kathryn E Bouskill

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

46 citing papers in PubMed, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Racial Differences in Colorectal Adenomas at Screening Colonoscopy in the United States.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025
    Observational
  11. Residential Segregation and Colorectal Cancer Screening in the United States, 2010 to 2018.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Colorectal Cancer Risk Perceptions Among Black Men in Florida.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Carolyn M RutterRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California. crutter@rand.org.
Amy B KnudsenInstitute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.ORCID 0000-0003-1872-996X
Jennifer S LinKaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, Portland, Oregon.
Kathryn E BouskillRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California.ORCID 0000-0001-7163-6290
RAND Corporation · USKaiser Permanente Center for Health Research · USMassachusetts General Hospital · US

Funding

Comparative Modeling of Colorectal Cancer: Informing Health Policies and Prioritizing Future ResearchU01CA199335 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI KUNTZ, KAREN M, LANSDORP-VOGELAAR, IRIS · 2015 to 2019
$5.5M
EPA EP-C-15-002NCI NIH HHS U01 CA199335
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Racial disparities in colorectal cancer incidence are widely documented. There are two potential mechanisms for these disparities: differences in access to screening, including screening follow-up, and differences in underlying risk of colorectal cancer. We reviewed the literature for evidence of these two mechanisms. We show that higher colorectal cancer incidence in blacks relative to whites emerged only after the dissemination of screening and describe evidence of racial disparities in screening rates. In contrast to the strong evidence for differences in colorectal cancer screening utilization, there is limited evidence for racial differences in adenoma prevalence. In general, black and white patients who are screened have similar adenoma prevalence, though there is some evidence that advanced adenomas and adenomas in the proximal colon are somewhat more likely in black than white patients. We conclude that higher rates of colorectal cancer incidence among black patients are primarily driven by lower rates of colorectal cancer screening. Our findings highlight the need to increase black patients' access to quality screening to reduce colorectal cancer incidence and mortality.

Indexed as

Health Status DisparitiesAdenomaBlack or African AmericanColorectal NeoplasmsHumansIncidenceMass ScreeningOutcome Assessment, Health CareRisk FactorsUnited StatesWhite People

Identifiers

PMID33144285
PMCPMC7855228
OpenAlexW3097429569

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.