Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39313626›Full record

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

Leveraging Multi-Sectoral Partnership for Colorectal Cancer Education and Screening in the African American Community: A Protocol and Preliminary Results.

Jungyoon Kim, Hongying Daisy Dai, Tzeyu Michaud, Sachi Verma, Keyonna M King, John W Ewing, Grace Mabiala-Maye, Paul Estabrooks

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 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. Rethinking gastric cancer prevention through an immigrant health lens.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2025
    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

8 authors.

Jungyoon KimDepartment of Health Services Research and Administration, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 984350 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, 68198, USA. jungyoon.kim@unmc.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-2945-2460
Hongying Daisy DaiDepartment of Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Tzeyu MichaudDepartment of Health Promotion, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Sachi VermaNebraska Hospital Association, Lincoln, NE, USA.
Keyonna M KingDepartment of Health Promotion, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
John W EwingDouglas County Treasurer Office, Omaha, NE, USA.
Grace Mabiala-MayeDepartment of Health Services Research and Administration, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 984350 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, 68198, USA.
Paul EstabrooksDepartment of Health and Kinesiology, University of Utah College of Health, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.

Funding

University of Nebraska Medical Center Innovation Fund
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Colorectal cancer (CRC) awareness and screening rates are still low in African Americans (AAs), especially for those who do not have regular access to health care. We established a multi-sector community partnership between academia, health system, cancer advocacy, and local county treasurer's office (CTO), to test a pilot CRC screening intervention using a tailored educational brochure and fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Participants were recruited at a local CTO in an urban midwestern region. Once eligible, participants were assigned to 2-by-2 intervention arms by educational strategy (brochure vs. no brochure) and FIT provision strategy (direct provision by onsite staff vs. indirect provision via phone/online request). We compared the effect of different strategies on FIT return rates. Of 1500 individuals approached, 212 were eligible for the study. The final sample consisted of 209 participants who were predominantly men (57%) and AAs (85%). No differences were found in the return rates by educational brochure (24% [brochure] vs. 23% [no brochure]; p = 0.82). In regard to FIT provision strategy, direct FIT provision yielded higher return rates than indirect provision (31% vs. 15%; p = 0.01). When the four groups were compared, direct provision with education brochure yielded the highest return rates (33.9%), followed by direct provision only (27.5%), indirect provision only (18%), and indirect provision with a brochure (12.2%). For community-based CRC screening intervention using stool-based test, the direct provision of FIT kits with educational brochure outperforms the other three strategies.

Indexed as

Black or African AmericanColorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerHealth EducationHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePatient Education as TopicAgedFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedOccult BloodPilot ProjectsCancer educationCommunity-based interventionFecal immunochemical testHealth disparitiesMulti-component approachMulti-sector partnership

Identifiers

PMID39313626
PMCPMC11978712

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.