Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37919624›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2024

Qualitative Interviews to Add Patient Perspectives in Colorectal Cancer Screening: Improvements in a Learning Health System.

Meghan M JaKa, Maren G Henderson, Samantha Alch, Jeanette Y Ziegenfuss, Andrew R Zinkel, Nathaniel D Osgood, Ann Werner, Caitlin M Borgert Spaniol, Matthew Flory, Patricia L Mabry

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Meghan M JaKaCenter for Evaluation & Survey Research, HealthPartners Institute, Bloomington, MN, USA. Meghan.M.JaKa@Healthpartners.com.
Maren G HendersonCenter for Evaluation & Survey Research, HealthPartners Institute, Bloomington, MN, USA.
Samantha AlchCenter for Evaluation & Survey Research, HealthPartners Institute, Bloomington, MN, USA.
Jeanette Y ZiegenfussCenter for Evaluation & Survey Research, HealthPartners Institute, Bloomington, MN, USA.
Andrew R ZinkelHealthPartners, Bloomington, MN, USA.
Nathaniel D OsgoodUniversity of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Ann WernerHealthPartners Institute, Bloomington, MN, USA.
Caitlin M Borgert SpaniolHealthPartners Institute, Bloomington, MN, USA.
Matthew FloryAmerican Cancer Society, St Paul, MN, USA.
Patricia L MabryHealthPartners Institute, Bloomington, MN, USA.
HealthPartners · USAmerican Cancer Society · USUniversity of Minnesota Medical Center · USUniversity of Saskatchewan · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Health systems are interested in increasing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates as CRC is a leading cause of preventable cancer death. Learning health systems are ones that use data to continually improve care. Data can and should include qualitative local perspectives to improve patient and provider education and care. This study sought to understand local perspectives on CRC screening to inform future strategies to increase screening rates across our integrated health system. Health insurance plan members who were eligible for CRC screening were invited to participate in semi-structured phone interviews. Qualitative content analysis was conducted using an inductive approach. Forty member interviews were completed and analyzed. Identified barriers included ambivalence about screening options (e.g., "If it had the same performance, I'd rather do home fecal sample test. But I'm just too skeptical [so I do the colonoscopy]."), negative prior CRC screening experiences, and competing priorities. Identified facilitators included a positive general attitude towards health (e.g., "I'm a rule follower. There are certain things I'll bend rules. But certain medical things, you just got to do."), social support, a perceived risk of developing CRC, and positive prior CRC screening experiences. Study findings were used by the health system leaders to inform the selection of CRC screening outreach and education strategies to be tested in a future simulation model. For example, the identified barrier related to ambivalence about screening options led to a proposed revision of outreach materials that describe screening types more clearly.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsLearning Health SystemColonoscopyEarly Detection of CancerHumansMass ScreeningOccult BloodColorectal cancer screeningLearning health systemsQualitative methodsSemi-structured interviewsThematic content analysis

Identifiers

PMID37919624
OpenAlexW4388301428

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.