ArticleCancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.)2024
Trends in Colorectal Cancer Screening from the National Health Interview Survey: Analysis of the Impact of Different Modalities on Overall Screening Rates.
Article in Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 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
23 citing papers in PubMed.
- Health Equity After a Colorectal Cancer Screening Program.JAMA health forum · 2026Article
- Characteristics and Effectiveness of Patient Navigation Programs on Colorectal Cancer Screening and Follow-Up Colonoscopy Uptake: A Systematic Review.AJPM focus · 2026Review
- Leveraging Text Messaging and Behavior Theory to Improve Colorectal Cancer Screening in Federally Qualified Health Centers: Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Colorectal Cancer Screening and Mortality Trends in the United States Over 25 Years: A Story of Success and Inequity.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Article
- Spatiotemporal trends, demographic disparities, and predictions to 2040 in gastrointestinal cancer mortality in the United States.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Temporal trends in the cause of death of patients with colon and rectal cancer.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2026Article
- Knowledge, Symptom Awareness, and Referral Practices of Primary Care Providers in Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer.Population health management · 2026Article
- Native American Women's Willingness to Screen for Both Cervical and Colorectal Cancer at Home.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Accurate and Scalable Classification of Colonoscopy Neoplasia Using Machine Learning and Natural Language Processing.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Article
- Optimizing Colonoscopy Capacity to Maximize Colorectal Cancer Outcomes.Gastro hep advances · 2026Article
- Mapping colorectal cancer screening workflows in primary care.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Value of Stool-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening: Integrating Real-World Adherence, Detection, and Prevention in a Cohort-Based Modeling Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Improving Colorectal Screening Compliance Through Targeted Quality Improvement Interventions in Primary Care.Cureus · 2025Article
- Article
- Changes in Colorectal Cancer Screening Modalities Among Insured Individuals.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Online Interest in Colorectal Cancer Screening in Florida.Southern medical journal · 2025Article
- Lower Neighborhood-Level Socioeconomic Status Is Associated with Lower Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake in the Southern Community Cohort Study.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2025Article
- Re-screening adherence to multi-target stool DNA test for colorectal cancer: real-world study in a large national population.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Article
- Impact of racial disparities in follow-up and quality of colonoscopy on colorectal cancer outcomes.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality in adults in the United States. Despite compelling evidence of improved outcomes in colorectal cancer, screening rates are not optimal. This study aimed to characterize colorectal cancer screening trends over the last two decades and assess the impact of various screening modalities on overall colorectal cancer screening rates. Using National Health Interview Survey data from 2005 to 2021, we examined colorectal cancer screening [colonoscopy, multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA), fecal occult blood test (FOBT)/fecal immunochemical test, sigmoidoscopy, CT colonography] rates among adults ages 50-75 years (n = 85,571). A pseudo-time-series cross-sectional (pseudo-TSCS) analysis was conducted including a random effects generalized least squares regression model to estimate the relative impact of each modality on changes in colorectal cancer screening rates. Among 50 to 75 year olds, the estimated colorectal cancer screening rate increased from 47.7% in 2005 to 69.9% in 2021, with the largest increase between 2005 and 2010 (47.7%-60.7%). Rates subsequently plateaued until 2015 but increased from 63.5% in 2015 to 69.9% in 2018. This was primarily driven by the increased use of mt-sDNA (2.5% in 2018 to 6.6% in 2021). Pseudo-TSCS analysis results showed that mt-sDNA contributed substantially to the increase in overall screening rates (77.3%; P < 0.0001) between 2018 and 2021. While colorectal cancer screening rates increased from 2005 to 2021, they remain below the 80% goal. The introduction of mt-sDNA, a noninvasive screening test may have improved overall rates. Sustained efforts are required to further increase screening rates to improve patient outcomes and offering a range of screening options is likely to contribute to achieving this goal. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: This retrospective study highlights the importance of convenient stool-based colorectal cancer screening options to achieve the national goal of 80% for overall colorectal cancer screening rates. Empowering screening-eligible individuals with a choice for their colorectal cancer screening tests is imperative.
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.