ArticleJAMA internal medicine2024
National Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening Use in Federally Qualified Health Centers.
Article in JAMA internal medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 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
36 citing papers in PubMed.
- From SMS Text Messaging to Screening Completion: Understanding How SMS Responses Influence Cancer Screening Uptake in Federally Qualified Health Center Clinics.Health services research · 2026Trial
- Equity Evaluation of an Intervention to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening at Federally Qualified Health Centers.Annals of family medicine · 2026Trial
- Time to Follow-Up Colonoscopy After Positive Fecal Immunochemical Test with Centralized Patient Navigation: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Centralized Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach in Federally Qualified Health Centers: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2024Trial
- Time to Cancer Screening Completion Following an SMS Reminder Intervention in a Large Federally Qualified Health Center Network: Secondary Data Analysis.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Article
- Comparative Analysis of Breast and Cervical Screening Adaptability at a Federally Qualified Health Center.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2026Article
- The Missing Millions: Building Cancer Pathology Artificial Intelligence for Safety Net Populations.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2026Review
- Medical mistrust, health system distrust, and their associations with healthcare delay and cancer screening attitudes in primary care.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Monitoring of Colorectal Cancer Screening Adherence Among African American Patients of North Florida Community Health Centers.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026Article
- Predictors of routine HPV-based cervical cancer screening adoption in federally qualified health centers within a multi-state practice research network 2012-2022: retrospective observational study.BMC primary care · 2026Observational
- Building capacity for equitable cervical cancer screening and follow-up in an FQHC-NCI cancer center partnership: a mixed-methods study of multilevel implementation determinants.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Leveraging Text Messaging and Behavior Theory to Improve Colorectal Cancer Screening in Federally Qualified Health Centers: Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates in Women Aged 45 to 64 Years.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Protocol paper for an implementation science approach to promoting colorectal cancer screening in Federally Qualified Health Center Clinics: A stepped-wedge, multilevel intervention trial.Contemporary clinical trials · 2026Article
- Cancer Screening in Federally Qualified Health Centers by Neighborhood Social Vulnerability: A National Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Spatial Access to Cancer Care Providers in National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Center Catchment Areas.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2026Article
- Roadblocks to Rural Health: State Transportation Policies' Impact on Health Care Access in Virginia's Rural Communities: 2021-2022.American journal of public health · 2026Article
- Colorectal cancer screening test preferences by sociodemographic factors and health beliefs in diverse underserved populations.Research square · 2026Article
- The cervical cancer divide: state variation in incidence, mortality, and progress toward elimination in the United States.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) deliver health care to nearly 30 million underserved persons across the US, yet nationwide and state-level breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening use in FQHCs is not described. Furthermore, it is unknown how the underscreened FQHC population contributes to the total underscreened population at national and state levels. Objective: To describe national- and state-level breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening use among individuals served by FQHCs in the US and to estimate the percentage of underscreened individuals in the general population served by FQHCs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional analysis of cancer screening used data from January 1 through December 31, 2020, from the FQHC Uniform Data System, reported by 1364 FQHCs across the US, and self-reported estimates from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Participants were 16 696 692 US adults served by FQHCs who were eligible for breast (age, 50-74 years), cervical (age, 21-64 years), and colorectal (age, 50-75 years) cancer screening. Analyses were conducted between January 1 and June 30, 2023. Exposures: Breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. Main Outcomes and Measures: Percentages of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening-eligible individuals up to date on screening. Results: A total of 3 162 882 breast, 7 444 465 cervical, and 6 089 345 colorectal screening-eligible individuals were served by FQHCs in 2020. Nationally, screening use in FQHCs was 45.4% (95% CI, 45.4%-45.5%) for breast cancer, 51.0% (95% CI, 51.0%-51.1%) for cervical cancer, and 40.2% (95% CI, 40.1%-40.2%) for colorectal cancer. Screening use among the US general population was 78.2% (95% CI, 77.6%-78.9%) for breast cancer, 82.9% (95% CI, 82.3%-83.4%) for cervical cancer, and 72.3% (95% CI, 71.7%-72.8%) for colorectal cancer. The contribution of the underscreened population served by FQHCs to the national underscreened general population was 16.9% (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 16.4%-17.4%) for breast cancer, 29.7% (95% UI, 28.8%-30.7%) for cervical cancer, and 14.7% (95% UI, 14.4%-15.0%) for colorectal cancer. Conclusions and Relevance: Findings from this national cross-sectional study indicated major gaps in cancer screening use in FQHCs in the US. Improved prevention is urgently needed to address screening disparities.
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.