ArticleCancers2024
The Association of the COVID-19 Pandemic with the Uptake of Colorectal Cancer Screening Varies by Socioeconomic Status in Flanders, Belgium.
Article in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The potential of soluble programmed cell death-ligand 1 and soluble programmed cell death 1 as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis.Irish journal of medical science · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the association of the COVID-19 pandemic with an uptake rate and screening interval between two screening rounds in colorectal cancer screening program (CRCSP) and identify the disproportionate correlation of socioeconomic status (SES) factors.
methodsAn analysis was performed on aggregated screening and SES data at the area level in Flanders, Belgium, during 2018-2022. The screening uptake rate was the percentage of people returning self-test results within 40 days after invitation, and the screening interval was the number of days between current and previous screening. Differences in uptake rate and screening interval before and during COVID-19 were categorized into 10 quantiles, and determinants were evaluated using quantile regression models.
resultsSignificant change was seen from March to August 2020. The areas with the greatest decrease in uptake rate and screening interval had low population density, and areas with the greatest increase in screening interval had the highest income and percentage of home ownership. In regression analysis, more people living alone (β = -0.09), lower income (β = 0.10), and a higher percentage of home ownership (β = -0.06) were associated with a greater decrease in uptake rate. Areas with lower population density (β = -0.75), fewer people of Belgian nationality (β = -0.11), and higher income (β = 0.42) showed greater increases in screening interval.
conclusionsDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, people in areas with low SES were less likely to participate in screening, whereas people in areas with high SES were more likely to delay participation. A tailored invitation highlighting benefits of CRCSP is needed for people with low SES to improve uptake. Timely warnings could help people who delay participation adhere to screening intervals.
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.