Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34083210›Full record

ArticleBMJ evidence-based medicine2022

Short and long-term psychosocial consequences of participating in a colorectal cancer screening programme: a matched longitudinal study.

Jessica Malmqvist, Volkert Dirk Siersma, Mie Sara Hestbech, Christine Winther Bang, Dagný Rós Nicolaisdóttir, John Brodersen

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ evidence-based medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jessica MalmqvistThe Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Kobenhavn, Denmark jessica.malmqvist@sund.ku.dk.ORCID 0000-0002-9299-4369
Volkert Dirk SiersmaThe Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Kobenhavn, Denmark.
Mie Sara HestbechThe Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Kobenhavn, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-8247-3642
Christine Winther BangThe Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Kobenhavn, Denmark.
Dagný Rós NicolaisdóttirThe Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Kobenhavn, Denmark.
John BrodersenThe Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Kobenhavn, Denmark.
University of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo investigate the psychosocial consequences of receiving a false-positive (no abnormalities) result or being diagnosed with polyps compared with receiving a negative result in a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programme. DESIGN AND

settingThis was a longitudinal study nested in the roll-out of the Danish CRC screening programme that targets all individuals aged 50-74 years.

participantsIn the inclusion period (April-September 2017), all positive screenees (n=1854) were consecutively enrolled and matched 2:1:1 on sex, age (±2 years), municipality and screening date with negative screenees (n=933) and individuals not yet invited to screening (n=933).Questionnaires were sent by mail to all eligible participants in Region Zealand, Denmark, after the screening result, 2 months and 12 months after the final result.Positive screenees who did not receive the follow-up procedure were excluded.

main outcome measuresThe primary outcomes were psychosocial consequences. Outcomes were measured with the CRC screening-specific questionnaire Consequences of screening in CRC with 11 outcomes after the screening result and with 21 outcomes at the two later assessments.

resultsAfter receiving the screening result, individuals with no abnormalities, low-risk and medium-risk and high-risk polyps scored significantly worse on 8 of 11 outcomes compared with the negative screenee group. At the 12-month follow-up, the differences were still significant in 8 of 21 outcomes (no abnormalities), 4 of 21 outcomes (low-risk polyps) and 10 of 21 outcomes (medium-risk and high-risk polyps). The negative screenee group and the group not yet invited to screening differed psychosocially on 5 of 11 outcomes after the screening result, but on none of the 21 outcomes at the 2 months and 12 months follow-up.

conclusionsThe study showed that there are both short-term and long-term psychosocial consequences associated with receiving a no abnormalities result or being diagnosed with polyps. The consequences were worst for individuals diagnosed with medium-risk and high-risk polyps.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerAgedHumansLongitudinal StudiesMiddle Agedevidence-based practiceprimary healthcarepublic health

Identifiers

PMID34083210
PMCPMC8961773
OpenAlexW3165794652

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.