ArticleThe American journal of managed care2025
Navigation and clinician payment investments enhance colorectal cancer screening benefits.
Article in The American journal of managed care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Predictors of Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates in Federally Qualified Health Centers: Explicating Organizational Level Factors.Health services research · 2026Article
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
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the US, with nearly 40% of eligible individuals not current on lifesaving CRC screening. Although stool-based screening tests offer accessible initial options, the CRC screening process is incomplete without a follow-up colonoscopy after a positive result. Unfortunately, low follow-up rates-particularly among socioeconomically disadvantaged groups-undermine the potential health benefits. Recent policies eliminating patient cost sharing for follow-up colonoscopies address one critical barrier but fail to overcome the systemic obstacles that impede screening completion. Patient navigation programs are a proven strategy to bridge these gaps. By addressing logistical, financial, and educational challenges, navigation services significantly improve follow-up colonoscopy rates. However, inadequate reimbursement has hindered their widespread implementation. Current funding models, including CMS' Principal Illness Navigation services, fall short of supporting preventive care such as CRC screening. To fully realize the potential of CRC screening, investments in patient navigation, enhanced clinician reimbursement for follow-up colonoscopies, and systemic reforms are essential. Modeling studies reveal a "win-win-win" scenario: Clinicians receive appropriate compensation for their critical role in follow-up care, payers achieve cost savings through efficient screening processes, and investments in navigation services help close disparities in CRC screening. Expanding navigation programs and incentivizing follow-up colonoscopies would increase screening rates, reduce disparities, and achieve population health gains. These investments represent a rare opportunity to align stakeholder interests, prevent CRC deaths, and advance health 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.