ArticleJMIR cancer2024
Examining Racial Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening and the Role of Online Medical Record Use: Findings From a Cross-Sectional Study of a National Survey.
Article in JMIR cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Colorectal Cancer Screening and Health-Related Social Needs in a National Sample of US Adults.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Optimizing Digital Health Tools for Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake in Federally Qualified Healthcare Centers: Insights From the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and Technology Acceptance Model.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2026Article
- Correlates of patient-centered discussions on colorectal cancer screening: results from the health information national trends survey (HINTS).Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Article
- Patient Portal Use and Cancer Screening in the United States: Individual Associations and Population Impact.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Early detection via routine CRC screening can significantly lower risks for CRC-specific morbidity and mortality. Public health initiatives between 2000 and 2015 nearly doubled CRC screening rates for some US adults. However, screening rates remain lowest for adults aged 45-49 years (20%), patients of safety net health care facilities (42%), adults without insurance (44%), and other subgroups compared with national averages (72%). Given the evolving landscape of digital health care and trends in web-based health information-seeking behaviors, leveraging online medical record (OMR) systems may be an underutilized resource to promote CRC screening utilization. Recognizing trends in OMR usage and patient demographics may enhance digital inclusion-a key social determinant of health-and support equitable web-based interventions aimed at boosting CRC screening across diverse populations. Objective: This study examined the association of accessing an OMR with CRC screening utilization and corresponding sociodemographic characteristics of US adults. Methods: In 2023, we conducted a secondary data analysis using a pooled, weighted sample from Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) 5 cycles, 2, 3, and 4 (2018-2020), a nationally representative survey assessing how US adults access and use health-related information. We analyzed the association between sociodemographic characteristics, medical conditions, OMR access, and CRC screening behaviors via logistic regression. Results: The sample included adults aged 45-75 years (N=5143). The mean age was 59 (SD 8) years for those who reported CRC screening and 52 (SD 6) years for those never screened. Nearly 70% (4029/5143) of participants reported CRC screening and 52% (2707/5143) reported OMR access in the past year. Adjusted odds of CRC screening were higher among non-Hispanic African American or Black adults than among non-Hispanic White adults (odds ratio [OR] 1.76, 95% CI 1.22-2.53), adults who accessed an OMR (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.45-2.46), older individuals (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.16-1.21), the insured (OR 3.69, 95% CI 2.34-5.82), and those with a professional or graduate degree versus those with a high school diploma or less (OR 2.65, 95% CI 1.28-5.47). Individuals aged 65-75 years were significantly more likely (P<.001) to be screened (1687/1831, 91%) than those aged 45-49 years (190/610, 29%). Conclusions: Promoting OMR access, especially among the most disadvantaged Americans, may assist in reaching national screening goals. Emphasis should be placed on the mutability of OMR use compared with most other statistically significant associations with CRC screening behaviors. OMR access provides an intervenable means of promoting CRC education and screening, especially among those facing structural barriers to cancer diagnoses and care. Future research should focus on tailored and accessible interventions that expand OMR access, particularly for younger populations.
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.