ReviewCancer management and research2025
Application of Patient Navigation in Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Scoping Review.
Review in Cancer management and research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The global incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer are rising annually, posing a severe threat to public health. Studies have shown that patient navigation can significantly improve adherence to colorectal cancer screening, thereby reducing incidence and mortality rates. This review aims to summarize the existing evidence on the application of patient navigation in colorectal cancer screening, to provide an evidence-based foundation for subsequent research and clinical practice. Methods: Based on Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review methodological framework, a search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang, and SinoMed for relevant studies published from database inception to May 20, 2025. Results: 25 studies were included. The findings indicate that navigator types primarily include trained professional navigators, medical navigators, and novel navigators. Service delivery methods were diverse, with telephone navigation being the primary mode, often combined with SMS, face-to-face, email, and other multi-modal collaborative interventions. Navigation service content encompassed six main themes: colorectal cancer education, barrier assessment and resolution, guidance and reminders for guaiac fecal occult blood test/fecal immunochemical test and bowel preparation, colonoscopy process management, and post-examination follow-up. Efficacy evaluation demonstrated that patient navigation overall enhances colorectal cancer screening adherence, although heterogeneity existed in outcomes such as bowel preparation quality and patient satisfaction. Conclusion: Current patient navigation services for colorectal cancer screening have formed a relatively mature intervention framework. However, there remains room for optimization in areas like the balance of service content and support for non-medical barriers. Future practice can draw upon existing research to implement full-cycle, culturally adapted, and cost-effective patient navigation interventions tailored to national contexts.
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.