ArticleJournal of medical screening2022
Prioritisation of colonoscopy services in colorectal cancer screening programmes to minimise impact of COVID-19 pandemic on predicted cancer burden: A comparative modelling study.
Article in Journal of medical screening, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Newly Introduced Population-Based Screening and the COVID-19 Pandemic on Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Characteristics: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Reducing endoscopic procedure backlog by improving efficiency: a predictive model and machine learning-based scheduling approach.Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Optimizing Colonoscopy Capacity to Maximize Colorectal Cancer Outcomes.Gastro hep advances · 2026Article
- Impact of COVID-19 on colorectal cancer screening in a federally qualified health center: Provider and staff perspectives.PloS one · 2026Article
- Annual Blood Tests Are an Acceptable form of Surveillance to Supplement Colonoscopies for Colorectal Cancer.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Article
- Maximizing scarce colonoscopy resources: the crucial role of stool-based tests.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2024Article
- Article
- Scoping review of modelling studies assessing the impact of disruptions to essential health services during COVID-19.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Potential global loss of life expected due to COVID-19 disruptions to organised colorectal cancer screening.EClinicalMedicine · 2023Article
- Characteristics of patient navigation programs in the Cancer Moonshot ACCSIS colorectal cancer screening initiative.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Clinical Prediction Models to Guide the Selection of Patients for Colon Capsule Endoscopy Versus Colonoscopy Following FIT-Positive Screening.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesColorectal cancer (CRC) screening with a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) has been disrupted in many countries during the COVID-19 pandemic. Performing catch-up of missed screens while maintaining regular screening services requires additional colonoscopy capacity that may not be available. This study aimed to compare strategies that clear the screening backlog using limited colonoscopy resources.
methodsA range of strategies were simulated using four country-specific CRC natural-history models: Adenoma and Serrated pathway to Colorectal CAncer (ASCCA) and MIcrosimulation SCreening ANalysis for CRC (MISCAN-Colon) (both in the Netherlands), Policy1-Bowel (Australia) and OncoSim (Canada). Strategies assumed a 3-month screening disruption with varying recovery period lengths (6, 12, and 24 months) and varying FIT thresholds for diagnostic colonoscopy. Increasing the FIT threshold reduces the number of referrals to diagnostic colonoscopy. Outcomes for each strategy were colonoscopy demand and excess CRC-related deaths due to the disruption.
resultsPerforming catch-up using the regular FIT threshold in 6, 12 and 24 months could prevent most excess CRC-related deaths, but required 50%, 25% and 12.5% additional colonoscopy demand, respectively. Without exceeding usual colonoscopy demand, up to 60% of excess CRC-related deaths can be prevented by increasing the FIT threshold for 12 or 24 months. Large increases in FIT threshold could lead to additional deaths rather than preventing them.
conclusionsClearing the screening backlog in 24 months could avert most excess CRC-related deaths due to a 3-month disruption but would require a small increase in colonoscopy demand. Increasing the FIT threshold slightly over 24 months could ease the pressure on colonoscopy resources.
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.