Trial reportJournal of general internal medicine2024
Bundling Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach with Screening for Social Risk in Federally Qualified Health Centers: A Stepped-Wedge Implementation-Effectiveness Study.
Trial report in Journal of general internal medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04585919 (Paired Promotion of Colorectal Cancer and Social Determinants of Health Screening), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 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.
Paired Promotion of Colorectal Cancer and Social Determinants of Health Screening
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Analysis of Breast and Cervical Screening Adaptability at a Federally Qualified Health Center.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2026Article
- Predictors of Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates in Federally Qualified Health Centers: Explicating Organizational Level Factors.Health services research · 2026Article
- Cancer Screening in Federally Qualified Health Centers by Neighborhood Social Vulnerability: A National Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Optimizing Digital Health Tools for Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake in Federally Qualified Healthcare Centers: Insights From the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and Technology Acceptance Model.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2026Article
- The Effectiveness ofCancers · 2025Article
- Evaluating the success of community engagement in the Implementation Science Center for Cancer Control Equity.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
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 at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBundling is combining individual interventions to meet quality metrics. Bundling offers of cancer screening with screening for social determinants of health (SDOH) may enable health centers to assist patients with social risks and yield efficiencies.
objectiveTo measure effects of bundling fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) and SDOH screening in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs).
designClustered stepped-wedge trial.
participantsFour Massachusetts FQHCs randomized to implement bundled FIT-SDOH over 8-week "steps."
interventionOutreach to 50-75-year-olds overdue for CRC screening to offer FIT with SDOH screening. The implementation strategy used facilitation and training for data monitoring and reporting. MAIN MEASURES: Implementation process descriptions, data from facilitation meetings, and CRC and SDOH screening rates. Rates were compared between implementation and control FQHCs in each "step" by fitting generalized linear mixed-effects models with random intercepts for FQHCs, patients, and "step" by FQHC. KEY
resultsFQHCs tailored implementation processes to their infrastructure, workflows, and staffing and prioritized different groups for outreach. Two FQHCs used population health outreach, and two integrated FIT-SDOH within established programs, such as pre-visit planning. Of 34,588 patients overdue for CRC screening, 54% were female; 20% Black, 11% Latino, 10% Asian, and 47% white; 32% had Medicaid, 16% Medicare, 32% private insurance, and 11% uninsured. Odds of CRC screening completion in implementation "steps" compared to controls were higher overall and among groups prioritized for outreach (overall: adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.41, p = 0.005; prioritized: aOR 2.88, p = 0.002). Odds of SDOH screening did not differ across "steps."
conclusionsAs healthcare systems are required to conduct more screenings, it is notable that outreach for a long-standing cancer screening requirement increased screening, even when bundled with a newer screening requirement. This outreach was feasible in a real-world safety-net clinical population and may conserve resources, especially compared to more complex or intensive outreach strategies. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04585919.
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.