ArticleGut and liver2022
Trends of Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates in Korea: Korean National Cancer Screening Survey 2005-2020.
Article in Gut and liver, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global colorectal cancer screening programs and coverage rate estimation: an evidence synthesis.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Pooled it
- The Effect of Intervention for Improving Colonoscopy Quality Is Associated with the Personality Traits of Endoscopists.Gut and liver · 2024Trial
- Non-invasive colorectal cancer screening: emerging tools and clinical evidence.Clinical endoscopy · 2026Review
- Cost-Effectiveness of Colonoscopy for Screening: What Matters Most?Gut and liver · 2026Article
- Recent trends in self-reported utilization of colonoscopy and fecal occult blood test in Europe: analysis of the European Health Interview Surveys 2013-2015 and 2018-2020.European journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Ulcerative colitis-associated colorectal neoplasm is increasing as a surgical indication in the biologics era: a retrospective observational study of 20 years of experience in a single tertiary center.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2025Article
- Article
- Comparative microbiome analysis of paired mucosal and fecal samples in Korean colorectal cancer patients.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of the Korean National Cancer Screening Program in Reducing Colorectal Cancer Mortality.Cancers · 2024Article
- Association between Endoscopist Volume and Interval Cancers after Colonoscopy: Results from the National Colorectal Cancer Screening Program in Korea.Cancer research and treatment · 2024Article
- Utilization of colorectal cancer screening tests: a systematic review and time trend analysis of nationally representative data.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Review
- Disparities in Overall Survival Rates for Cancers across Income Levels in the Republic of Korea.Cancers · 2024Article
- Development and Effectiveness Evaluation of 360-Degree Virtual Reality-Based Educational Intervention for Adult Patients Undergoing Colonoscopy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Utilization of colorectal cancer screening tests across European countries: a cross-sectional analysis of the European health interview survey 2018-2020.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2024Article
- Article
- The Impact of Neighborhood Deprivation on the Survival Rates of Patients with Cancer in Korea.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Deep learning approach to detection of colonoscopic information from unstructured reports.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023Article
- Disparities in All-Cause Mortality in Older Patients with Colorectal Cancer According to Disability Status: A Nationwide Analysis.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Article
- The Emerging Epidemic of Early-Onset Cancer: Global Patterns, Biological Complexity, and Urgent Calls for Action.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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Aims: Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is important in reducing the morbidity and mortality of CRC. Thus, this study aimed to describe the trends of CRC screening in both organized and opportunistic settings in Korea from 2005 to 2020 according to sociodemographic characteristics. Methods: This study analyzed the data of adults aged 50 to 74 years from the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey. Trends for CRC screening rates (fecal immunochemical test [FIT] within the last year, double-contrast barium enema within the last 5 years, or colonoscopy within the last 10 years for 2005-2018 and FIT within the last year or colonoscopy within the last 10 years for 2019-2020) were analyzed using Joinpoint regression. The trends were also analyzed according to sociodemographic characteristics, including age, sex, monthly household income, education level, and residential area. Results: A total of 29,040 participants were included in the analysis. The CRC screening rate significantly increased from 25.0% to 60.1%, with an annual percent change (APC) of 9.2% between 2005 and 2014, followed by a nonsignificant increase to 64.4% between 2014 and 2020 (APC,1.7%). When the participants were stratified according to sociodemographic factors, the participants with higher household income and education levels generally had higher screening rates. Conclusions: There has been substantial improvement in CRC screening rates in the general Korean population. However, it is necessary to determine why the screening rate has stabilized since 2014 and identify barriers that cause disparities in CRC screening rates among populations with lower socioeconomic status.
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.