Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33505142›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2020

Impact of colorectal cancer screening participation in remote northern Canada: A retrospective cohort study.

Heather A Smith, Andrew D Scarffe, Nicole Brunet, Cait Champion, Kami Kandola, Alisha Tessier, Robin Boushey, Craig Kuziemsky

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Cancer-related care for rural and remote populations in Canada: A scoping review.Canadian oncology nursing journal = Revue canadienne de nursing oncologique · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. A 5-year evaluation of early-and late-onset sporadic colorectal cancer screening in central Saudi Arabia.Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association
    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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Heather A SmithDepartment of Surgery, University of Ottawa, Ottawa K1Y4E9, Ontario, Canada.
Andrew D ScarffeTelfer School of Management, University of Ottawa, Ottawa K1N6N5, Ontario, Canada.
Nicole BrunetFaculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa K1Y4E9, Ontario, Canada.
Cait ChampionDepartment of Surgery, Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Sudbury P3E2C6, Ontario, Canada.
Kami KandolaDepartment of Health and Social Services, Government of the Northwest Territories, Yellowknife X1A1P5, Northwest Territories, Canada.
Alisha TessierDepartment of Surgery, Stanton Territorial Health Authority, Yellowknife X1A0H1, Northwest Territories, Canada.
Robin BousheyDivision of General Surgery, University of Ottawa, Ottawa K1H 8L6, Ontario, Canada.
Craig KuziemskyOffice of Research Services, MacEwan University, Edmonton T5J4S2, Alberta, Canada.
University of Ottawa · CAGovernment of Northwest Territories · CANOSM University · CAMacEwan University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundScreening provides earlier colorectal cancer (CRC) detection and improves outcomes. It remains poorly understood if these benefits are realized with screening guidelines in remote northern populations of Canada where CRC rates are nearly twice the national average and access to colonoscopy is limited.

aimTo evaluate the participation and impact of CRC screening guidelines in a remote northern population.

methodsThis retrospective cohort study included residents of the Northwest Territories, a northern region of Canada, age 50-74 who underwent CRC screening by a fecal immunohistochemical test (FIT) between January 1, 2014 to March 30, 2019. To assess impact, individuals with a screen-detected CRC were compared to clinically-detected CRC cases for stage and location of CRC between 2014-2016. To assess participation, we conducted subgroup analyses of FIT positive individuals exploring the relationships between signs and symptoms of CRC at the time of screening, wait-times for colonoscopy, and screening outcomes. Two sample Welch

results6817 fecal tests were completed, meaning an annual average screening rate of 25.04%, 843 (12.37%) were positive, 629 individuals underwent a follow-up colonoscopy, of which, 24.48% had advanced neoplasia (AN), 5.41% had CRC. There were no significant differences in stage, pathology, or location between screen-detected cancers and clinically-detected cancers. In assessing participation and screening outcomes, we observed 49.51% of individuals referred for colonoscopy after FIT were ineligible for CRC screening, most often due to signs and symptoms of CRC. Individuals were more likely to have AN if they had signs and symptoms of cancer at the time of screening, waited over 180 d for colonoscopy, or were indigenous [respectively, estimated RR 1.18 95%CI of RR (0.89-1.59)]; RR 1.523 (CI: 1.035, 2.240); RR 1.722 (CI: 1.165, 2.547)].

conclusionScreening did not facilitate early cancer detection but facilitated higher than anticipated AN detection. Signs and symptoms of CRC at screening, and long colonoscopy wait-times appear contributory.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerAgedCanadaColonoscopyFecesHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedOccult BloodRetrospective StudiesColorectal neoplasmsEarly detection of cancerGastroenterologyNorthwest TerritoriesPublic healthRural health services

Identifiers

PMID33505142
PMCPMC7789056
OpenAlexW3114546263

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.