ArticleJournal of primary care & community health
Colorectal Cancer Screening in Rural and Urban Primary Care Practices Amid Implementation of the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act.
Article in Journal of primary care & community health. 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.
- Association between prediagnostic risk factors and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis in Golesten cohort study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Implementing an Organized Colorectal Cancer Screening Program: Lessons Learned From an Academic-Community Practice.AJPM focus · 2024Article
- Having a Routine Source of Healthcare and Its Impact on Colorectal Cancer Screening Recommendation Compliance.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA) incentivized primary care practices to improve colorectal cancer screening rates. This study examined if colorectal screening rates improved among rural and urban primary care practices amid implementation of MACRA.
methodsColorectal cancer screening data are from a national registry of 139 primary care practices. Repeated measures regression tested for rural/urban differences and changes in screening rates between 2016 and 2020, adjusting for county demographic factors and social deprivation.
resultsScreening rates were 64% in both rural and urban practices in the first quarter of 2016 and increased to 80% and 83% in rural and urban practices, respectively, in the last quarter of 2020. In adjusted analyses, screening rates increased by 4% per year and there were no rural/urban differences. Lower screening rates were associated with higher county proportions of persons who were 45 to 74 years of age and Hispanic. Higher screening rates were associated with higher county proportions of persons who were White, Black, and Asian and higher social deprivation.
conclusionsColorectal screening rates improved among rural and urban primary care practices during implementation of MACRA, but disparities persist among practices serving county populations that are relatively older, more Hispanic, and have higher social deprivation.
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.