Trial reportPloS one2025
Acceptability and implementation potential of colorectal cancer screening and health literacy training: A qualitative study among general practitioners in deprived areas.
Trial report in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04631692 (Impact of Health Literacy Training for General Practitioners and a Consumer Facing Intervention to Improve Colorectal Cancer Screening in Underserved Areas), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
Impact of Health Literacy Training for General Practitioners and a Consumer Facing Intervention to Improve Colorectal Cancer Screening in Underserved Areas: A Multicentric Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) is a significant contributor to cancer-related burden, ranking second in cancer mortality in France. Despite the proven survival benefits of systematic CRC screening, uptake remains suboptimal, particularly among people with limited health literacy (HL) and lower socioeconomic position. This study aimed to assess the acceptability of an e-learning training programme on HL and CRC screening among general practitioners (GPs) in deprived areas while also exploring strategies for its promotion and scale-up.
methodsA qualitative study nested within the DECODE cluster-randomised controlled trial (NCT04631692) across four French regions was conducted. Semi-structured interviews (phone or online) were carried out to capture opinions, experiences, and recommendations of GPs in the intervention arm. Thematic analysis, employing manual and NVivo coding, was performed.
resultsThe majority of 22 GPs (16/22) found the training acceptable, informative, tailored to their knowledge needs and offering great flexibility of use. The module on HL garnered more interest than the one on CRC screening, as it addressed a relatively new area for many GPs. It facilitated reflection on patient communication techniques and identified areas for improvement in physician-patient interaction. A perceived gap in the training was the insufficient interactivity in both didactic and virtual group sessions.
conclusionThe findings of this study show high acceptability of the e-learning training by participants, indicating a potential for implementation, if kept concise, self-paced, asynchronous, and with a stronger focus on HL. The training helped GPs reflect on their practices, enhance HL knowledge, and improve patient communication strategies, leading some to adopt new techniques in daily interactions with low HL patients, beyond just screening.
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.