Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35787844›Full record

ArticlePreventive medicine2022

Assessing the impact of multicomponent interventions on colorectal cancer screening through simulation: What would it take to reach national screening targets in North Carolina?

Karen Hicklin, Meghan C O'Leary, Siddhartha Nambiar, Maria E Mayorga, Stephanie B Wheeler, Melinda M Davis, Lisa C Richardson, Florence K L Tangka, Kristen Hassmiller Lich

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Preventive medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Provision of colonoscopy in rural settings: A qualitative assessment of provider context, barriers, facilitators, and capacity.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Karen HicklinDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Herbert Wertheim College of Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA. Electronic address: khicklin@ufl.edu.
Meghan C O'LearyDepartment of Health Policy & Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Siddhartha NambiarCovalent Solutions, LLC., Rockville MD, USA.
Maria E MayorgaDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA.
Stephanie B WheelerDepartment of Health Policy & Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; Center for Health Promotion & Disease Prevention, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Melinda M DavisOregon Rural Practice-based Research Network, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA; Department of Family Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA; School of Public Health, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland State University, Portland, OR, USA.
Lisa C RichardsonCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Florence K L TangkaCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Kristen Hassmiller LichDepartment of Health Policy & Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

Funding

Center for Health Promotion and Disease PreventionU48DP005017 · DP · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI AMMERMAN, ALICE S, WHEELER, STEPHANIE BROOKE · 2014 to 2018
$10.9M
Dissemination, Implementation, and Evaluation of Native STAND in AI CommunitiesU48DP005006 · DP · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI BECKER, THOMAS MARK · 2014 to 2018
$6.3M
Oregon Patient Centered Outcomes Research K12 ProgramK12HS022981 · AHRQ · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI GUISE, JEANNE-MARIE · 2014 to 2018
$4.1M
Cancer Health Disparities Training ProgramT32CA128582 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI ENG, EUGENIA, TATE, DEBORAH F. · 2009 to 2023
$3.4M
Cancer Care Quality Training ProgramT32CA116339 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI ETHAN M. BASCH, Stephanie Brooke Wheeler · 2018 to 2026
$3.0M
Using Context to Improve Implementation of Evidenced-based Interventions for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Rural Primary Care (Precise CRC)K07CA211971 · NCI · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI DAVIS, MELINDA MARIE · 2017 to 2020
$683k
ACL HHS U48DP005006ACL HHS U48DP005017AHRQ HHS K12 HS022981Intramural CDC HHS CC999999NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48 DP005006NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48 DP005017NCI NIH HHS K07 CA211971NCI NIH HHS T32 CA116339NCI NIH HHS T32 CA128582
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Healthy People 2020 and the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable established colorectal cancer (CRC) screening targets of 70.5% and 80%, respectively. While evidence-based interventions (EBIs) have increased CRC screening, the ability to achieve these targets at the population level remains uncertain. We simulated the impact of multicomponent interventions in North Carolina over 5 years to assess the potential for meeting national screening targets. Each intervention scenario is described as a core EBI with additional components indicated by the "+" symbol: patient navigation for screening colonoscopy (PN-for-Col+), mailed fecal immunochemical testing (MailedFIT+), MailedFIT+ targeted to Medicaid enrollees (MailedFIT + forMd), and provider assessment and feedback (PAF+). Each intervention was simulated with and without Medicaid expansion and at different levels of exposure (i.e., reach) for targeted populations. Outcomes included the percent up-to-date overall and by sociodemographic subgroups and number of CRC cases and deaths averted. Each multicomponent intervention was associated with increased CRC screening and averted both CRC cases and deaths; three had the potential to reach screening targets. PN-for-Col + achieved the 70.5% target with 97% reach after 1 year, and the 80% target with 78% reach after 5 years. MailedFIT+ achieved the 70.5% target with 74% reach after 1 year and 5 years. In the Medicaid population, assuming Medicaid expansion, MailedFIT + forMd reached the 70.5% target after 5 years with 97% reach. This study clarifies the potential for states to reach national CRC screening targets using multicomponent EBIs, but decision-makers also should consider tradeoffs in cost, reach, and ability to reduce disparities when selecting interventions.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerColonoscopyHumansMass ScreeningNorth CarolinaOccult BloodUnited StatesColorectal cancer screeningModelingMulticomponent interventionsPopulation-level outcomesSimulationTargets

Identifiers

PMID35787844
PMCPMC11056941

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.