Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37099816›Full record

SynthesisClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2023

Economic evaluations of colorectal cancer screening: A systematic review and quality assessment.

Marcela Castro Ramos, Julio Augusto de Lima Passone, Ana Carolina de Freitas Lopes, Adriana Vaz Safatle-Ribeiro, Ulysses Ribeiro Júnior, Patrícia Coelho de Soárez

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Cost-effectiveness of testing biofluid biomarkers to diagnose Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

6 authors.

Marcela Castro RamosDepartamento de Medicina Preventiva, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (FMUSP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Julio Augusto de Lima PassoneFaculdade de Saúde Pública (FSP), Universidade de São Paulo (USP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Ana Carolina de Freitas LopesDepartamento de Medicina Preventiva, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (FMUSP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Adriana Vaz Safatle-RibeiroDepartamento de Gastroenterologia, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (FMUSP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Ulysses Ribeiro JúniorDepartamento de Gastroenterologia, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (FMUSP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Patrícia Coelho de SoárezDepartamento de Medicina Preventiva, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (FMUSP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil. Electronic address: patricia.soarez@usp.br.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Colorectal Cancer (CRC) is the third most common type of cancer worldwide and ranks second in mortality. Screening programs for early detection and treatment have been implemented in several countries. Economic evaluations are an important tool to support decision-making about reimbursement and coverage decisions in health systems and, therefore, to support efficient resource allocation. The article aims to review the up-to-date evidence on economic evaluations of CRC screening strategies. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, SCOPUS, SciELO, Lilacs, CRD databases, and lists of references were reviewed to identify relevant literature regarding full economic evaluations of CRC screening in asymptomatic average-risk individuals over 40 years old. Searches were conducted with no restriction to language, setting, or date. Qualitative syntheses described CRC screening strategies and comparators (baseline context), study designs, key parameter inputs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Seventy-nine articles were included. Most of the studies were from high-income countries and a third-party payer perspective. Markov models were predominantly used, although microsimulation has been increasingly adopted in the last 15 years. The authors found 88 different screening strategies for CRC, which differed in the type of technique, the interval of screening, and the strategy, i.e., isolated or combined. The annual fecal immunochemical test was the most predominant screening strategy. All studies reported cost-effective results in their scenarios compared to no screening scenarios. One-quarter of the publications reported cost-saving results. It is still necessary to develop future economic evaluations in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs), which account for the high burden of disease.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerAdultCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansColorectal neoplasmsCost-benefit analysisSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37099816
PMCPMC10182269

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.