ArticleJournal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM2025
Shared Decision Making in Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Scoping Review.
Article in Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM, 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.
- Family Medicine in Today's World: Virtual Care, Artificial Intelligence, Vaccine Hesitancy, and More.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionColorectal cancer (CRC) is easily detectable with screening, but due to a variety of factors, over a third of eligible people do not get screened. One barrier to people getting adequate screening is confusion about what type of test to use. Shared decision making (SDM) is a way for the clinician to help the patient decide about whether to get screened for CRC and if so, which test to use. This scoping review examines literature about shared decision making in CRC screening to identify key factors affecting a patient's decision.
methodsWe identified studies published from January 1, 2010 through May 18, 2024 through searching 4 databases. Studies were peer reviewed publications in English that investigated the role of shared decision making in colorectal cancer screening in average risk adults, aged 45 -75, in the United States and Canada. Two independent researchers screened all titles and abstracts for eligibility and reviewed all included full text articles. The included studies were examined for themes affecting a patient's choice of screening test.
resultsOf the 5672 unique records identified, we included 28 studies in this scoping review. Four themes emerged as being important to the process of shared decision making in colon cancer screening: knowledge of specific aspects of each test, clinician recommendation, acknowledgment of strong emotions surrounding screening, and importance of external factors in decisions around screening. Patients relied on family members for information about screening and made decisions about screening using this information as well as logistics of the test chosen.
conclusionFuture work can focus on the importance of external factors in screening decisions and recognizing and addressing the real emotions about CRC screening.
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.