ArticleScientific reports2025
Cost effectiveness analysis of three colorectal cancer screening modalities in Kuwait.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Cost-Effectiveness of Colonoscopy for Screening: What Matters Most?Gut and liver · 2026Article
- Article
- Trend analysis and epidemiological forecasting of colorectal Cancer mortality among reproductive-age women in sub-Saharan Africa.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) poses a significant health challenge in Kuwait, ranking as the second most common cancer with the incidence rate 13.2 cases per 100,000 people in year 2019. This study aims to determine the cost-effectiveness of three colorectal cancer (CRC) screening methods in Kuwait from the perspective of Kuwait's healthcare providers. Using a Decision Tree Analysis Model, the study compared three screening modalities: Fecal Occult Blood Test (FOBT) followed by colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy alone, sigmoidoscopy alone and alongside no screening. Over a 10-year period post-diagnosis, the model tracked costs and outcomes based on CRC patients' life expectancy, expressing results using Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs). Colorectal cancer screening using FOBT followed by colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy resulted in 7.7 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at a cost of USD 3,573. In contrast, no screening achieved 7.2 QALYs but was more expensive, costing USD 4,084. Screening with only sigmoidoscopy or only colonoscopy provided 6.8 QALYs each, at costs of USD 4,905 and USD 5,002, respectively. Sensitivity analyses explored uncertainties in cost and outcome estimates. FOBT followed by colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy can be considered as an efficient and effective approach towards early detection of CRC. This approach can be used by healthcare policymakers in Kuwait, in the development of population-based CRC screening programs to optimize resource allocation and improve public health outcomes.
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.