ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2025
Implications of the initial Braidwood v. Becerra ruling for colorectal cancer outcomes: a modeling study.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) eliminated patient cost-sharing for United States Preventive Service Task Force (USPSTF) recommended services. However, if the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit fully upheld a US District Court ruling in Braidwood Management v. Becerra, 666 F. Supp. 3d 613 (N.D. Tex 2023), cost-sharing for USPSTF recommendations made after ACA passage would have been reinstated for more than 150 million people. The case would have reinstated cost-sharing for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening for ages 45-49 years and for polyp removal during (diagnostic) colonoscopy across all ages. Using the MISCAN-Colon model, we simulated the potential impact on CRC outcomes, assuming early-onset CRC trends and lower screening participation. An 8-percentage-point decline in screening participation could increase CRC incidence by 5.1% and CRC mortality by 9.1%, with slightly lower costs due to increased cost-sharing. Larger decreases in screening participation can result in higher costs from increased incidence and delayed diagnoses.
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.