ArticleBMC cancer2025
The impact of patient-reported factors of endoscopic screening experience on attendance at future examinations and distal colorectal cancer incidence.
Article in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic examinations can reduce colorectal cancer (CRC) burden through early detection and removal of precancerous lesions; however, after initial endoscopy, some patients do not attend subsequent examinations.
aimsTo investigate the impact of patient experience of endoscopic screening on attendance at future examinations and distal CRC incidence.
methodsIn a cohort study including 40,141 participants who received flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening in the UK FS Screening Trial, median follow-up was 16.8 years. We examined family history of CRC, bowel preparation quality, segment of bowel reached, and responses to patient-reported post-examination questionnaires. We estimated multivariable odds ratios (OR) for attendance at future examinations by logistic regression and hazard ratios (HR) for associations between patient experience at FS and distal CRC incidence.
resultsOf those recommended a future endoscopy, 7.1% did not attend repeat FS, 3.4% did not attend colonoscopy, 18.3% did not attend surveillance, and 0.5% developed distal CRC. Symptoms of faintness/dizziness (OR = 5.10 95%CI 1.49-17.42) were associated with non-attendance at repeat FS. Non-attendance at surveillance was associated with whether participants felt they had made the right decision to take the tests; that taking the tests was tempting fate; that they needed the tests; or that they would rather have let nature take its course. A FS more painful than expected (HR = 0.57 95%CI 0.37-0.88) was inversely associated with distal CRC incidence.
conclusionsWe identified aspects of patient experience at endoscopy that could be used to improve attendance at future endoscopic examinations, which in turn could reduce CRC incidence. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN28352761. Trial registration date: April 2000.
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.