ArticleBMJ open2021
General populations' preferences for colorectal cancer screening: rationale and protocol for the discrete choice experiment in the SIGMO study.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hearing Aids Use Preferences Among Older Adults with Hearing Loss: A Discrete Choice Experiment.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
- Association of distal adenoma and hyperplastic polyp characteristics with long-term proximal colon cancer risk: a secondary, observational analysis of data from the UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening Trial.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2025Observational
- Intended and Actual Participation in the Colorectal Cancer Screening Program.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2024Observational
- Review
- National cancer screening program for colorectal cancer in Korea.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2023Review
- Attributes in stated preference elicitation studies on colorectal cancer screening and their relative importance for decision-making among screenees: a systematic review.Health economics review · 2022Review
- Article
- Attributes Characterizing Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests That Influence Preferences of Individuals Eligible for Screening in Germany: A Qualitative Study.Patient preference and adherence · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn Germany, the organised colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programme includes the immunologic faecal occult blood test and colonoscopy. The sigmoidoscopy is recommended for individuals rejecting colonoscopy but is not included into the screening programme. To examine whether the evidence based sigmoidoscopy should be additionally offered, the first objective of this study is to evaluate the demand for sigmoidoscopy by analysing the German general populations' preferences for CRC screening. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Preference data will be collected using a discrete choice experiment (DCE). Identification and selection of the attributes and their levels will be supported by evidence resulting from a systematic literature search and focus groups. An efficient, fractional factorial choice design will be generated. In a cross-sectional study, the DCE will be administered as a written questionnaire to a random sample of 4000 members of the statutory health insurance company in Lower Saxony (AOK Lower Saxony). Insured persons 50-60 years of age without CRC or a chronic inflammatory bowel disease will be eligible. The collected choice data will be analysed by conducting a conditional logit regression model and latent class models. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Hannover Medical School (reference number 8671_BO_K_2019). The study results will be disseminated via conference presentations, publications in peer-reviewed journals and, to participants, the membership magazine of the AOK Lower Saxony. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00019010.
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.