ArticleGastrointestinal tumors2021
Screening Status as a Determinant of Choice of Colorectal Cancer Screening Method: A Population-Based Informed Survey.
Article in Gastrointestinal tumors, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimizing colorectal cancer screening through quality circles of primary care physicians: a cluster randomized controlled trial.International journal of public health · 2026Trial
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesFecal blood testing is a noninvasive alternative to colonoscopy for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and is preferred by a substantial proportion of individuals. However, participant-related determinants of the choice of screening method, particularly up-to-date screening status, remain less studied. We aimed to determine if up-to-date screening status was related to choosing a fecal blood test over colonoscopy.
settingParticipants in the population-based cross-sectional survey study Bus Santé in Geneva, Switzerland - aged 50-69 years.
designCross-sectional survey study using mailed questionnaires inquiring about CRC screening method of choice after providing information on advantages and disadvantages of both screening methods. We used multivariable logistic regression models to determine the association between up-to-date CRC screening status and choosing fecal blood testing. KEY
resultsWe included 1,227 participants. Thirty-eight percent of participants did not have up-to-date CRC screening. Overall, colonoscopy (54.9%) was preferred to fecal blood testing (45.1%) (
conclusionsNot having up-to-date screening was independently associated with fecal blood testing as the preferred method for CRC screening. Proposing this method to this subpopulation, in a context of shared decision, could potentially increase screening uptake in settings where it is already high.
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.