ArticlePreventive medicine reports2022
Factors influencing colorectal cancer screening decision-making among average-risk US adults.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Increasing colorectal cancer screening among Alaska Native peoples living in remote areas of Alaska: a multitarget stool DNA cluster randomized controlled trial.BMC primary care · 2026Trial
- Colorectal Cancer Screening Communication and Completion Among Black and Hispanic Primary Care Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Colorectal Cancer Screening Communication and Completion Among Black and Hispanic Primary Care Patients.Research square · 2026Article
- The Lingering Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Colorectal Cancer Screening Modalities and Staging by Neighborhood-Level Deprivation.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Colorectal Cancer in Mississippi: How to Change the Tide of Bad News to a Success Story?Cureus · 2025Review
- Factors Associated with Attending to the Colorectal Cancer Screening Services among at-Risk Individuals in a Community Care Hospital: A Cross-Sectional Analytical Study.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2025Article
- Exploring factors influencing decision making for colonoscopy in first-degree relatives of patients with colorectal cancer: a mixed-methods study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Predictors of Colorectal Cancer Screening and Screening Modalities among Patients seen at Federally Qualified Health Centers Funded by the United States Health Resources and Services Administration.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- Correlates of U.S. Adults Aged 50-75 Years Having Had a Colorectal Cancer Screening Test.AJPM focus · 2024Article
- Attitudes and Experiential Factors Associated with Completion of mt-sDNA Test Kit for Colorectal Cancer Screening.Journal of patient experience · 2023Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates remain suboptimal in the US. We examined patient-focused concerns and influence of various factors (e.g., test attributes, provider recommendation) on CRC screening decision-making. We conducted a web survey with 1595 US adults aged 40-75 from a nationally representative panel in November 2019 (completion rate: 31.3 %). Analyses focused on individuals aged 45-75 years at average-risk for CRC (n = 1062). All participants rated their level of concern about various CRC screening test/procedure attributes. Participants who have screened previously designated the three most important attributes for choosing a screening method and rated how various factors influenced their decision to use a particular method. The top concern for participants who have not screened previously was having an invasive procedure (54.2 %) while the top concerns for participants who have screened previously were completing a colon prep (41.3 %) and test/procedure accuracy (41 %). Cost/insurance coverage was most frequently ranked among the most important attributes (48.5 %), followed by where the test can be taken (45.7 %) and test accuracy (43.6 %). Provider recommendation was reported as the major motivator across screening methods. Other factors that were frequently reported as very influential included convenience and comfort for the stool-based methods and scientific/clinical evidence and insurance coverage for colonoscopy. Variations by age, sex, and race/ethnicity were noted. Findings demonstrate that along with provider recommendation, patient preferences regarding test/procedure attributes and preparation requirements are influential in screening decision-making, highlighting the need for clinicians to involve patients in shared decision-making and incorporate patient needs and preferences in establishing screening strategies.
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.