ArticleAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2023
Evaluating the Effectiveness of a Modified Colorectal Cancer Screening Program in Almaty, Kazakhstan.
Article in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a modified colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program, incorporating culturally tailored strategies to increase screening uptake and compliance, in Almaty, Kazakhstan.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted in Almaty between 2019-2022, involving 5370 participants aged 50-70 from diverse settings. Participants were assigned to the main (modified method) and comparison (standard method) groups based on the parity of their ID number digits. Variables of interest included demographics, somatic comorbidities, disability degree, and CRC screening results. The modified screening emphasized healthcare prioritization, optimized nursing resources, enhanced accessibility, and preparedness for the second screening stage.
resultsIn the study 2702 patients in the main group (modified method), and 2668 patients in the comparison group (standard method). Comorbidity data showed that the majority of participants in both groups had between 1-10 comorbidities, with an average of 8.2 in the main group and 8.1 in the comparison group. Screening response rates at stage I were higher in the main group, with 82.6% of subjects undergoing screening, compared to 78.9% in the comparison group (χ2=12.12, p=0.001). The response rates were higher among females in both groups, and no significant differences were found across age groups. At stage II, the response rate was again higher in the main group (56.2%) than in the comparison group (47.2%) (χ2=4.217, p=0.040), with no significant differences noted in relation to sex or age. However, the main group showed a higher response rate at stage I among respondents with 6-10 comorbidities (87.1% vs 82.5%, χ2 =7.820, p=0.009).
conclusionThe study demonstrates that the modified program significantly outperformed the traditional one, achieving higher response rates at both the initial and subsequent stages of screening. These findings emphasize the value of revisiting and refining current CRC screening methods to maximize early detection rates.
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.