ArticlePloS one2021
Rate and associated factors of refusal to perform immunochemical Faecal Occult Blood Test (iFOBT) among semi-urban communities.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Disparities in Recommendations for Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Average-Risk Individuals: An Ecobiosocial Approach.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2022Review
- Rejection of Fecal Immunochemical Tests Within the Lower Gastrointestinal Diagnostic Pathway: A Cohort Study.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The uptake of the immunochemical faecal occult blood test (iFOBT) in many countries with an opportunistic colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programme remains suboptimal. This study aimed to determine the rate, associated factors and reasons of refusal to perform the iFOBT test offered under an opportunistic CRC screening programme in semi-urban communities. This cross-sectional study was conducted among the average-risk individuals living in semi-urban areas, who sought care from public primary care centres across Kedah state, Malaysia. The information regarding the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of individuals who were offered the iFOBT between January and April 2019, along with their willingness to perform the test, was gathered. The factors associated with the refusal were further explored using the logistic regression analysis. The individuals offered the iFOBT (n = 920) were mainly female (52.4%) and had a mean age of 58.7±10.6 years. The refusal rate of the iFOBT was 32.2%. Patients who did not have hypertension (adjusted OR: 3.33; 95% CI: 2.44, 4.54), did not have CRC symptoms (adjusted OR: 3.15; 95% CI:1.26, 7.89), had the test offered by either medical assistants (adjusted OR: 2.44; 95% CI: 1.71, 3.49) or nurses (adjusted OR: 2.41; 95% CI 1.65, 3.51), did not have diabetes (adjusted OR: 1.99; 95% CI: 1.42, 2.77),and were not active smokers (adjusted OR: 1.74; 95% CI: 1.22, 2.47), were more likely to refuse the iFOBT. The common reasons of refusing the test included "feeling not ready for the test" (21.6%) and "feeling healthy" (14.9%). The iFOBT was refused by one-third of the average-risk individuals from semi-urban communities. The associated factors and reasons of refusal found in this study could guide policymakers in developing targeted interventions to boost the uptake of CRC screening in Malaysia.
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.