ReviewNorthern clinics of Istanbul2023
Recognition and participation of colorectal cancer screening in Turkiye: A systematic review and meta-analysis study.
Review in Northern clinics of Istanbul, 2023. 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.
- The colorectal cancer screening gap in Türkiye: A tripartite survey of barriers among patients and surgeons.Turkish journal of surgery · 2026Article
- Evaluation of colorectal cancer awareness of pharmacy faculty students.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Colorectal cancer and associated genetic, lifestyle, cigarette, nargileh-hookah use and alcohol consumption risk factors: a comprehensive case-control study.Oncology reviews · 2024Article
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
Colorectal cancers (CRCs) have an important share in the prevalence and mortality among all cancers. It was aimed to make a systematic review and meta-analysis of researches about the prevalence of knowing fecal occult blood test (FOBT) and colonoscopy, which are among the CRC screening methods, and the prevalence of having these tests at any time in life. A literature search using five different databases were screened both in Turkish and English language and a total of 1176 studies were reached. Of these, 22 studies were selected to be included in this study. In the evaluation of the researches included in the study, the studies were read in a way to look for answers to PICOS questions. Open Meta-analyst demo program and random effects model was used. The prevalence rate and 95% confidence interval of knowing and having FOBT and colonoscopy were calculated. According to the meta-analysis results, the prevalence of knowing the FOBT among the CRC screening tests was 19.3%, the prevalence of having the FOBT was 13.2%, the prevalence of knowing colonoscopy was 31.7%, and the prevalence of having colonoscopy was 10.0%. As a conclusion prevalence of knowing and having FOBT and colonoscopy was low in risky individuals in Turkiye.
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.