ArticleBMC gastroenterology2022
A risk scoring system for advanced colorectal neoplasia in high-risk participants to improve current colorectal cancer screening in Tianjin, China.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Colonoscopy outcomes of primary screening negative participants highlight the missed diagnosis problem of colorectal cancer screening: an observational study from Yuexiu district in Guangzhou, China.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Age, frequency, and strategy optimization for organized colorectal cancer screening: a decision analysis conducted in China for the years 2023-2038.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGiven the limited effectiveness of the current Chinese colorectal cancer (CRC) screening procedure, adherence to colonoscopy remains low. We aim to develop and validate a scoring system based on individuals who were identified as having a high risk in initial CRC screening to achieve more efficient risk stratification and improve adherence to colonoscopy.
methodsA total of 29,504 screening participants with positive High-Risk Factor Questionnaire (HRFQ) or faecal immunochemical test (FIT) who underwent colonoscopy in Tianjin from 2012-2020 were enrolled in this study. Binary regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between risk factors and advanced colorectal neoplasia. Internal validation was also used to assess the performance of the scoring system.
resultsMale sex, older age (age ≥ 50 years), high body mass index (BMI ≥ 28 kg/m
conclusionsOur results showed that the established scoring system could identify very high-risk populations with colorectal neoplasia. Combining this risk score with current Chinese screening methods may improve the effectiveness of CRC screening and adherence to colonoscopy.
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.