Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33563069›Full record

ArticlePublic health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)

A Correctional-Public Health Collaboration for Colorectal Cancer Screening in a State Prison System.

Dora M Dumont, Deborah Davis, Radha Sadacharan, Eric Lamy, Jennifer G Clarke

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Cancer Screening Rates and Outcomes for Justice-Involved Individuals: A Scoping Review.Journal of correctional health care : the official journal of the National Commission on Correctional Health Care · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Dora M Dumont6749 Division of Community Health and Equity, Rhode Island Department of Health, Providence, RI, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9546-5665
Deborah Davis144103 Rhode Island Department of Corrections, Cranston, RI, USA.
Radha Sadacharan6752 Department of Family Medicine, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
Eric Lamy6749 Division of Community Health and Equity, Rhode Island Department of Health, Providence, RI, USA.
Jennifer G Clarke144103 Rhode Island Department of Corrections, Cranston, RI, USA.
Rhode Island Department of Health · USBrown University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Correctional facilities provide health care to large numbers of medically underserved people. As such, preventive health in correctional settings is an important yet underused investment in public health. Because they often have histories of poor access to health care, the justice-involved population is more likely than the general population to be diagnosed with advanced-stage cancers. We report on the first 2 years of an ongoing collaboration between a state correctional system and state health department to implement annual colorectal cancer screening for sentenced people using fecal immunochemical testing (FIT). Preparation for the annual iterations begins in January, and patient engagement begins in March. In the first year of implementation (2018), 1396 of 1856 (75.2%) sentenced people completed an eligibility screen, and 254 of 321 (79.1%) eligible patients completed a FIT (eligible patients were aged ≥50 [≥45 if Black] in year 1 [lowered to ≥45 in year 2] and reported no previous relevant medical or family history of colorectal cancer); 54 (21.3%) completed FITs were positive. Of the 54 patients with positive FITS, 33 (61.1%) completed follow-up colonoscopies resulting in the identification of polyps in 26 (48.1%) patients with a positive FIT. We found invasive adenocarcinoma for 2 (3.7%) of the positive FITs (6.1% of colonoscopies performed). In the second year (2019), after a conversion from paper to tablet-based eligibility screening, 1707 of 2059 (82.9%) sentenced people completed an eligibility screen, and 200 of 285 (70.2%) eligible patients completed a FIT, 27 (13.5%) of whom had a positive result. We share lessons learned about implementing mass screening to encourage further communication among departments of health and corrections to advance preventive health.

Indexed as

ColonoscopyColorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMaleOccult BloodPrisonsRhode Islandcancer screeningcolorectal cancercorrectional facilitiesprison

Identifiers

PMID33563069
PMCPMC8361559
OpenAlexW3126752880

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.