Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39031303›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2025

Patient-Provider Communication and Colorectal Cancer Screening Completion Using Multi-target Stool DNA Testing.

Xuan Zhu, Linda Squiers, Gabriel Madson, Leah Helmueller, Brian G Southwell, Shama Alam, Lila J Finney Rutten

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The Waiting Curriculum: Teaching the Time Between Cancer Events.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Xuan ZhuRobert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Healthcare Delivery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. zhu.xuan@mayo.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-6675-2155
Linda SquiersRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Gabriel MadsonRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Leah HelmuellerExact Sciences Corporation, Madison, WI, USA.
Brian G SouthwellRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Shama AlamExact Sciences Corporation, Madison, WI, USA.
Lila J Finney RuttenDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening continues to be underutilized in the USA despite the availability of multiple effective, guideline-recommended screening options. Provider recommendation has been consistently shown to improve screening completion. Understanding how patient-provider communication influences CRC screening can inform interventions to improve screening completion. We developed a behavioral theory-informed survey to identify patient-provider communication factors associated with multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) screening completion. The survey was administered by RTI International between 03/2022 and 06/2022 to a sample of US adults ages 45-75 who received a valid order for mt-sDNA screening with a shipping date between 5/2021 and 9/2021. Respondents completed an electronic or paper survey. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify patient-provider communication factors associated with mt-sDNA test completion. A total of 2973 participants completed the survey (response rate, 21.7%) and 81.6% of them (n = 2427) reported having had a conversation with provider about mt-sDNA testing before the test was ordered. Having a conversation with the provider about the test, including discussions about costs, the need for follow-up testing and test instructions were associated with higher odds of test completion and being "very likely" to use the test in the future. Lack of discussion about advantages and disadvantages of available CRC screening options and lack of patient involvement in CRC screening decision-making were associated with reduced odds of test completion and likelihood of future use. Healthcare providers play a key role in patient adherence to CRC screening and must be appropriately prepared and resourced to educate and to engage patients in shared decision-making about CRC screening.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsCommunicationEarly Detection of CancerFecesPhysician-Patient RelationsAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesCancer educationColorectal cancer screeningMulti-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA)Provider communicationProvider recommendation

Identifiers

PMID39031303
PMCPMC11846718

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.