Trial reportAmerican journal of health promotion : AJHP2022
Cost-Effectiveness of Community-to-Clinic Tailored Navigation for Colorectal Cancer Screening in an Underserved Population: Economic Evaluation Alongside a Group-Randomized Trial.
Trial report in American journal of health promotion : AJHP, 2022. 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.
- Disparities in Access to Gastrointestinal Care in the United States.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Review
- Return on investment of community health workers in the United States: a systematic review.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2026Article
- Characteristics and Effectiveness of Patient Navigation Programs on Colorectal Cancer Screening and Follow-Up Colonoscopy Uptake: A Systematic Review.AJPM focus · 2026Review
- Spinoza, Liberation From Causation, and Community Health Promotion.American journal of health promotion : AJHP · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAlthough screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) lowers mortality and morbidity and is generally cost-effective, little is known about the cost-effectiveness of screening promotion.
designCost-effectiveness analysis alongside a group-randomized trial. Setting: Multicultural, underinsured communities in the Phoenix, Arizona, area. SUBJECTS: English- or Spanish-speaking adults who were out of compliance for CRC screening guidelines.
interventionAll participants received community-based group education (GE), and the intervention group also received tailored community-to-clinic navigation (GE+TN). MEASURES: Number of participants screened and costs of tailored navigation, clinic visits, and CRC screening tests. ANALYSIS: Incremental cost per additional person screened from the perspective of the healthcare system with bootstrapped confidence intervals.
resultsCommunity sites were recruited and randomized to GE (n = 120) and GE + TN (n = 119). Across these sites 1154 individuals were screened, 504 were eligible, and 345 attended the group education class (n = 134 GE; n = 211 GE + TN). Screening rates (26.5% GE + TN; 10.4% GE; 16.1% increase 95% CI: 7%, 23%) and costs per participant ($271 GE + TN; $167 GE; a net cost increase of $104 95% CI: $1, $189) were significantly higher in the intervention group. Incremental cost-effectiveness was $646 (95% CI: -$68, $953) per additional person screened.
conclusionDepending on the value placed on an additional person screened, the addition of community-to-clinic tailored navigation to a community-based CRC screening promotion program may be highly cost-effective.
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.