Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39707155›Full record

Trial reportFamily practice2025

Using an SMS to improve bowel cancer screening: the acceptability and feasibility of a multifaceted intervention.

Jennifer G McIntosh, Anna Wood, Mark Jenkins, Shakira Onwuka, Patty Chondros, Tina Campbell, Edweana Wenkart, Clare O'Reilly, Ian Dixon, Julie Toner and 3 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Family practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

13 authors.

Jennifer G McIntoshMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, 207 Bouverie Street, Carlton, Victoria 3153, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6655-0940
Anna WoodMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, 207 Bouverie Street, Carlton, Victoria 3153, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0637-2481
Mark JenkinsMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, 207 Bouverie Street, Carlton, Victoria 3153, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8964-6160
Shakira OnwukaMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, 207 Bouverie Street, Carlton, Victoria 3153, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8510-6351
Patty ChondrosDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, Level 3, Medical Building, University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0393-8734
Tina CampbellHealthily Pty Ltd, Level 5/492 St Kilda Rd, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia.
Edweana WenkartPen Computer Systems, 301 Catherine St, Leichhardt, NSW 2040, Australia.
Clare O'ReillyCancer Council Victoria, Level 8/200 Victoria Parade, East Melbourne, Victoria  3002, Australia.
Ian DixonConsumer representative, Melbourne, Australia.
Julie TonerConsumer representative, Melbourne, Australia.
Javiera Martinez GutierrezDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, Level 3, Medical Building, University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2493-9974
Linda GovanWestern Victoria Primary Health Network, 131 Myers St, Geelong, Victoria 3220, Australia.
Jon D EmeryDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, Level 3, Medical Building, University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5274-6336

Funding

ARC Laureate Fellowship FL190100035NHMRC Investigator APP1195302Victoria Cancer Agency Mid-Career Research Fellowship MCRF21025Victorian Cancer Agency project CPRSRG19018
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program sends an immunochemical faecal occult blood test to Australians aged 50-74 years to screen for bowel cancer, but uptake is low (40.9%). The SMARTscreen trial demonstrated that sending a short messaging services (SMS) prompt from the participant's general practitioner (GP) increased the proportion of kit returns by 16.5%. This research aimed to determine the acceptability and feasibility of implementing SMARTscreen.

methodSMARTscreen was a cluster randomized controlled trial set in 21 Australian general practices in regional Australia. Participants and general practice staff involved in the trial were included in this study. Acceptability and feasibility were measured quantitatively by calculating proportions of the SMS received, viewed, or opted out of, and qualitatively by interviewing people who sent and received the SMS.

resultsOf 2914 SMS sent, 2645 SMS (91%) were received by participants, 1128 (43%) people opened the weblink, and 59 (2%) people opted out of receiving future SMS. Interviews with general practice staff (n = 17) and participants (n = 18) found that sending and receiving the SMS was acceptable and feasible. The SMS was considered a low-burden activity that easily integrated into the clinic's workflow without impacting clinicians' time. Participants reported an increased intention to participate in screening, but some people worried the weblink was spam, and some suggested sending it out of working hours.

conclusionThe SMS-based intervention was widely accepted by GP staff and participants. Future research should test the SMS with and without the weblink, and send the SMS at a more convenient time of the day/week.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerMass ScreeningPatient Acceptance of Health CareText MessagingAgedAustraliaFeasibility StudiesFemaleGeneral PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedOccult Bloodcolorectal neoplasmsendorsementgeneral practicequalitativequalitative researchscreeningSMStext messaging

Identifiers

PMID39707155
PMCPMC11770820

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.