Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40996970›Full record

ArticlePLOS digital health2025

Digital health interventions for colorectal cancer screening uptake: A scoping review.

Sujin Kim, Andrew J Whipkey, Jihye Bae, Avinash Bhakta

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sujin KimDivision of Biomedical Informatics, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7878-4322
Andrew J WhipkeyDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, United States of America.
Jihye BaeDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, United States of America.
Avinash BhaktaDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, United States of America.

Funding

Oncology Research Training for Surgeon-ScientistsT32CA160003 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY · PI Bernard Mark Evers, Pamela Carmen Hull · 2011 to 2026
$3.2M
NCI NIH HHS T32 CA160003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Digital health interventions (DHIs) are increasingly employed to improve colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake, yet comprehensive syntheses of their effectiveness across diverse contexts remain scarce. This scoping review examines how individual, contextual, technological, and timing-related factors shape CRC screening outcomes in DHI-based trials. Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov from March 1 to April 20, 2024, identifying 4,523 records through databases and an additional 2,039 through backward citation tracking. After deduplication and screening, 51 studies were included and charted using the PICOT (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Timing) framework. Included studies spanned urban health systems, rural community clinics, and Federally Qualified Health Centers in the United States, Europe, Asia, and Australia, with intervention durations ranging from six weeks to ten years. Keyword co-occurrence mapping revealed four thematic domains: (1) patient-centered technology and adherence, (2) behavioral design and personalization, (3) clinical workflow and provider interaction, and (4) equity, disparities, and community engagement. Findings showed that tailored telephone outreach, mailed fecal immunochemical testing combined with navigation support, EMR-based automated reminders, and mobile applications delivering personalized education increased screening rates by 20.9% to 37.7% compared with conventional approaches. Hybrid models combining digital tools with human facilitation were particularly effective for underserved populations, including racial and ethnic minorities, rural communities, and individuals with limited health literacy. However, research gaps persist for younger adults at risk for early-onset CRC and for understanding the long-term sustainability and cost-effectiveness of digital interventions. Temporal aspects such as intervention timing, frequency, and duration were identified as important factors but were inconsistently reported. Future research should address digital health literacy, implementation barriers, and long-term follow-up to support sustained CRC screening adherence through user-centered, scalable, and culturally responsive digital solutions.

Identifiers

PMID40996970
PMCPMC12463253

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.