ReviewCureus2023
Colorectal Cancer Diagnostic Methods: The Present and Future.
Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Inflammation and Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of the Prognostic Significance of the Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index (SII) and the Systemic Inflammation Response Index (SIRI).International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Pooled it
- Diagnostic and prognostic significance of ALU-based cell-free DNA in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Design and evaluation of a colon cancer mobile application.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Trial
- Research advances in early screening for colorectal cancer (Review).Molecular and clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Metagenome analysis reveals multi-kingdom gut microbiota as diagnostic markers for colorectal cancer.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Precision Medicine in Colorectal Cancer: Targeted Therapies and Biomarker Insights.Current cancer drug targets · 2026Review
- Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Colorectal Cancer Surgery: Surgical Outcomes and Tumor Characteristics in a Multicenter Retrospective Cohort.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Insights from age-stratified endoscopic detection metrics support initiating colorectal cancer screening at age 45.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Review
- Article
- Modified Neutrophil Platelet Scores (MNPs): A Novel Prognostic Marker in Colorectal Cancer.Journal of inflammation research · 2025Article
- Role of microRNA in colorectal carcinoma (CRC): a narrative review.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Review
- Review
- Colorectal Cancer Survival in German-Danish Border Regions-A Registry-Based Cohort Study.Cancers · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To meet the needs of the colorectal cancer (CRC) patient population, colorectal cancer screening is continuously updated. The most significant advice is to start CRC screening exams at age 45 for people at average risk for CRC. CRC testing is divided into two categories: stool-based tests and visual inspections. High-sensitivity guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing, fecal immunochemical testing, and multitarget stool DNA testing are stool-based assays. Colon capsule endoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy are visualization examinations. There have been arguments about the importance of these tests in detecting and managing precursor lesions because of the lack of validation of screening results. Recent advancements in artificial intelligence and genetics have prompted the creation of newer diagnostic tests, which require validation in diverse populations and cohorts. In this article, we have discussed the present and emerging diagnostic tests.
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.