ArticleEClinicalMedicine2023
Potential global loss of life expected due to COVID-19 disruptions to organised colorectal cancer screening.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impacts of a Public Health Emergency on Cancer Testing Rates, Follow-up, and Cancer Diagnosis: An Evaluation of the COVID-19 Pandemic.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Article
- Long-Term Health and Economic Impacts of COVID-19 Disruptions on Bowel Cancer Inequalities in Victoria, Australia: A Modelling Study.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Impact of Newly Introduced Population-Based Screening and the COVID-19 Pandemic on Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Characteristics: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Re-evaluating the access imperative in healthcare in the United States.Journal of public health policy · 2026Review
- Re-Evaluating Access in Healthcare: Focus on Quality of Care.Public health challenges · 2025Review
- Cancer Screening Progress and Noninvasive Screening Opportunities since the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2025Article
- Article
- Re-evaluating population-level screening recommendations to address increasing early-onset colorectal cancer rates in Australia: a modelling study.ESMO gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of tailored talks between a cancer screening specialist and general practitioners to improve the uptake of colorectal cancer screening in Ancona (Italy) during the pandemic period.The European journal of general practice · 2024Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer mortality in Brazil.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mortality among patients with colorectal cancer in Hiroshima, Japan: A large cancer registry study.Cancer medicine · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) decreases cancer burden through removal of precancerous lesions and early detection of cancer. The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted organised CRC screening programs worldwide, with some programs completely suspending screening and others experiencing significant decreases in participation and diagnostic follow-up. This study estimated the global impact of screening disruptions on CRC outcomes, and potential effects of catch-up screening. Methods: Organised screening programs were identified in 29 countries, and data on participation rates and COVID-related changes to screening in 2020 were extracted where available. Four independent microsimulation models (ASCCA, MISCAN-Colon, OncoSim, and Policy1-Bowel) were used to estimate the long-term impact on CRC cases and deaths, based on decreases to screening participation in 2020. For countries where 2020 participation data were not available, changes to screening were approximated based on excess mortality rates. Catch-up strategies involving additional screening in 2021 were also simulated. Findings: In countries for which direct data were available, organised CRC screening volumes at a country level decreased by an estimated 1.3-40.5% in 2020. Globally, it is estimated that COVID-related screening decreases led to a deficit of 7.4 million fewer faecal screens performed in 2020. In the absence of any organised catch-up screening, this would lead to an estimated 13,000 additional CRC cases and 7,900 deaths globally from 2020 to 2050; 79% of the additional cases and 85% of additional deaths could have been prevented with catch-up screening, respectively. Interpretation: COVID-19-related disruptions to screening will cause excess CRC cases and deaths, but appropriately implemented catch-up screening could have reduced the burden by over 80%. Careful management of any disruption is key to improving the resilience of colorectal cancer screening programs. Funding: The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by Cancer Council New South Wales, Health Canada, and Dutch National Institute for Public Health and Environment.
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.