ArticleAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2021
The Intention and Uptake of Colorectal Cancer Screening after a Brief Health Education Program in a Malaysian Primary Care Setting: A Population-Based Study.
Article in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The mediating role of resilience in the relationship between empowerment and benefit finding among Chinese colorectal cancer patients.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Breast cancer and breast cancer screening use-beliefs and behaviours in a nationwide study in Malaysia.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Colorectal cancer screening barriers and facilitators among Jordanians: A cross-sectional study.Preventive medicine reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the most common cancer in men and the second most common cancer in women in Malaysia. A major challenge for CRC screening programs is to improve the screening participation rates. In Malaysia, the most critical barrier to the uptake of CRC screening is the lack of patient awareness. This study aimed to determine the intention and the uptake of CRC screening, and to explore the related motivators and barriers after raising awareness with a brief health education.
methodsAn analytical cross-sectional study was conducted in a government health clinic of Penang from March to August 2019. Asymptomatic clinic attendees aged 50-75 years who had no prior awareness of CRC screening were recruited by systematic random sampling technique. Participants first received a standardised one to one health education, followed by an interview using a standardised questionnaire to assess their CRC screening intention and the relevant motivators and barriers. A submission of a sample for immunochemical faecal occult blood test (iFOBT) was considered as an uptake of the CRC screening.
resultsA total of 546 participants participated in this study. The mean age of the participants was 62.8 (SD=6.36). Majority of them were females (57.3%), Chinese (78.6%), who had attained primary or higher education (92.0%) and had comorbidities (87.0%). After a brief health education, 231 participants (42.3%) agreed to undergo iFOBT. The actual screening uptake rate in this study was 28%. Perceived benefit of the test (84.4%) was the most common motivators, while self-perceived non-vulnerability was the biggest impediment to CRC screening intention. Physicians' recommendation was the perceived most effective way in raising CRC awareness.
conclusionParticipants prefer physicians to provide health education. Standardised brief health education is inadequate to stimulate CRC screening adherence. Future interventions will require in-depth understanding of patients' beliefs, risk perception, and affective responses.
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.