ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Europe2024
Utilization of colorectal cancer screening tests across European countries: a cross-sectional analysis of the European health interview survey 2018-2020.
Article in The Lancet regional health. Europe, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Geographical Disparities in Faecal Immunochemical Test-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Participation and Positivity Rates: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026Pooled it
- Testing feedback and social norms messages to increase participation: the BESTcc randomised controlled trial among non-respondents in population-based colorectal cancer screening programmes in Tuscany.SSM - population health · 2026Article
- Healthcare seeking with colorectal cancer symptoms-results from two Danish population-based surveys in 2012 and 2022.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2026Article
- Article
- A Qualitative Exploration of the Decision Not to Take Part in Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Women Living in Lower Socio-Economic Areas.Psycho-oncology · 2026Article
- Mailed faecal immunochemical test programmes and educational inequalities in colorectal cancer screening in Europe: a difference-in-differences analysis.International journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Social support and country-level factors associated with cancer screening participation in 18 European countries: a multilevel analysis of the European Health Interview Survey.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Article
- Adherence to Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Women in Spain: Evidence from the 2023 Spanish Health Survey.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Access or Engagement: The Potential Role of Financial Incentives in Colorectal Cancer Screening.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2026Article
- Applying the 5P framework to improve cancer prevention in European health systems.Journal of public health policy · 2026Article
- Evaluating incidence and mortality trends of early-onset colorectal cancer and adenoma in Belgium.ESMO gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- Impact of Newly Introduced Population-Based Screening and the COVID-19 Pandemic on Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Characteristics: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Variation in diagnostic performance of fecal immunochemical test (FIT) by cutoffs used in screening programs globally.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Early-detection and prevention effects of screening sigmoidoscopy: evidence from randomized trials revisited.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
- Assessment of the adherence and willingness to participate in colorectal cancer screening programs among people living in prison.PloS one · 2026Article
- Long-term effectiveness of endoscopic and stool-based colorectal cancer screening strategies: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2026Review
- Sex-specific differences in healthcare utilization and preventive service uptake between immigrant and native-born populations in Spain: a matched analysis of the 2023 national health survey.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Colonoscopy Versus Fecal Occult Blood Test Versus No Screening: A Comparative Analysis of Long-Term Effects.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2026Observational
- Comprehensive profiling of lncRNAs and mRNAs enriched in small extracellular vesicles for early noninvasive detection of colorectal cancer: diagnostic panel assembly and extensive validation.Molecular oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has been shown to reduce CRC incidence and mortality, and most European countries have started to implement CRC screening programs in the past 20 years. Consequently, this study aimed to estimate the utilization of fecal tests and colonoscopy, as well as investigate factors associated with their utilization based on specific screening program characteristics in European countries. Methods: We analyzed data from the European Health Interview Survey 2018-2020 to determine the utilization of fecal tests [guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) or fecal immunochemical test (FIT)] within the preceding 2 years or colonoscopy within the preceding 10 years among people aged 50-74 years, based on the type of screening offered in each country. Using multivariable logistic regression and sub-group meta-analysis, factors associated with screening use were determined. Findings: The analyses included data from 129,750 respondents across 29 European countries, with participant counts ranging from 1511 individuals in Iceland to 11,755 individuals in Germany. Unit response rates ranged from 22% to 88%. The use of either test was highest among countries with fully rolled-out programs with fecal tests [from 37.7% (867/2379) in Croatia to 74.9% (2321/3085) in Denmark] and in countries offering colonoscopy as an alternative screening method [from 26.2% (854/3329) in Greece to 75.4% (1192/1760) in Luxembourg]. We observed the lowest utilization of either test in countries with no program or small-scale programs [6.3% (195/3179) in Bulgaria to 34.2% (722/2144) in Latvia]. Across all types of screening offers, younger age, being without a partner, low education, rural residence, and living in large households were associated with lower utilization, as were poor lifestyle scores and prolonged periods without physician consultation. Interpretation: Our findings point to large disparities and much room for improvement in CRC screening offers and utilization across Europe. Funding: There was no funding source for this study.
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.