ArticleBMC gastroenterology2023
A new modality of colorectal cancer screening based on chronic disease management.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo develop a new modality of colorectal cancer screening based on chronic disease management (CDM) to improve the participation rate of screening, and maximize the benefits of limited resources.
methodsPatients under CDM were assigned to screening intervention group (SI) and screening control group1 (SC1), residents from natural community were assigned to screening control group2 (SC2). A parallel controlled community intervention study was performed. Only SI would achieve "one-to-one" intervention services. Meanwhile, 200 subjects were selected from each of the three groups for the Knowledge-Attitude-Practice (KAP) questionnaire before and after intervention, named questionnaire intervention group(QI), questionnaire control group1(QC1) and questionnaire control group2(QC2). The outcome of the intervention was evaluated using the difference-in-differences method and multiple regression analysis.
resultsThe preliminary screening participation rate was 43.63%(473/1084) in SI, 14.32%(132/922) in SCI, and 5.87%(105/1789) in SC2. The baseline questionnaire showed low knowledge scores in the three questionnaire groups with no statistically significant differences, while attitude scores in QI and QC1 were significantly higher than QC2. The differences between baseline and terminal showed QI increased larger in knowledge and attitude scores than QC1 and QC2, while no difference was detected between QC1 and QC2.
conclusionThe colorectal cancer screening model based on chronic disease management effectively improved the screening participation rate, and the "one-to-one" intervention and the inherent characteristics of the patient population under CDM were the core elements of the new modality.
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.