Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39191895›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2024

Intention to have blood-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) screening: a cross-sectional population-based survey in England.

Ninian Schmeising-Barnes, Jo Waller, Laura A V Marlow

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Ninian Schmeising-BarnesCentre for Cancer Screening, Prevention and Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Jo WallerCentre for Cancer Screening, Prevention and Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Laura A V MarlowCentre for Cancer Screening, Prevention and Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK. l.marlow@qmul.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1709-2397

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTrials assessing the clinical utility of blood-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests are underway. Understanding public attitudes towards MCED screening is essential if these tests are to be used. We aimed to quantify MCED screening intention and potential barriers and facilitators to uptake.

methodsAdults aged 50-77 (n = 958) completed an online survey. The primary outcome was intention to have MCED screening if offered. Psychological variables including barriers and facilitators were assessed. We used logistic regressions to explore associations between socio-demographics and psychological factors and intention.

results93.8% of participants said they would 'definitely' or 'probably' have MCED screening if offered. Intention was significantly associated with previous screening participation and general cancer attitudes but not with socio-demographic factors. Participants were more likely to be intenders if they had higher health motivation, and perceived greater benefits of blood tests. Participants were less likely to be intenders if they perceived greater disadvantages of blood tests, more practical barriers, were more worried about the outcome and more concerned about a positive result. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: MCED screening intention was high. The lack of socio-demographic variation suggests equitable interest in this type of screening; however, future research should consider how intention translates to uptake.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerIntentionNeoplasmsAgedCross-Sectional StudiesEnglandFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID39191895
PMCPMC11443085

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.