ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Empowering Men to Take Control of Their Own Health: Development and Validation of the Men's Response to Colorectal Cancer Screening Scale (MR-CCSS).
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesDespite the proven effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening, men are less likely to participate than women, with emotional, behavioural and informational barriers contributing to this disparity. The aim of this study was to develop and validate the Men's Response to Colorectal Cancer Screening Scale (MR-CCSS), a gender-sensitive instrument for measuring key factors that influence the participation of men in colorectal cancer screening.
methodsThe scale was developed through a structured process that included qualitative data from focus groups (
resultsThe EFA revealed a five-factor structure. Together, these factors explained 61.9% of the total variance. The CFA confirmed the robustness of the model (CFI = 0.928, TLI = 0.910 and RMSEA = 0.056). The internal consistency was acceptable to good, with Cronbach's alpha between 0.665 (factor 4) and 0.833 (factor 5) for the subscales and 0.863 for the total scale. The ROC analysis showed moderate predictive accuracy (AUC = 0.702), with an optimal cut-off value of 92.5 (sensitivity = 0.782 and specificity = 0.509) for participation in screening.
conclusionsThe MR-CCSS is a valid and reliable tool for identifying barriers to colorectal cancer screening in men. Its use can serve as a basis for gender-specific interventions, customised health education and strategies to improve screening equity.
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.