ArticleAJPM focus2026
Knowledge and Practice Behaviors of Community-Based Resident Physicians Surrounding Cancer Screening.
Article in AJPM focus, 2026. 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.
- Physician-Level Determinants of Cervical Cancer Screening Practices: A Socio-Ecological Model-Based Study from Adjara, Georgia.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Cancer screening programs have significantly reduced mortality rates associated with cervical, breast, and colorectal cancers over the past few decades. However, inconsistencies in screening guidelines among healthcare providers raise concerns about the uniformity of recommendations. Methods: This study uses a survey to investigate the practice behaviors and knowledge of cancer screening guidelines among medical residents in family medicine, internal medicine, and general surgery community-based residency programs in the state of Colorado. A multi-institution survey was conducted, with 72 resident physicians participating. The study explores the sources from which residents acquire screening guidelines and evaluates their accuracy in recommending screening ages for colorectal, breast, and cervical cancers. Results: Results indicate a preference for guidelines from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, although there are variations in recommendations among specialties. Although residents demonstrate good knowledge of cervical cancer screening, they exhibit inconsistencies in breast cancer screening ages. Conflicting guidelines are perceived to impact patients' quality of care and confidence in the healthcare system. Residents primarily learn screening recommendations during medical school, highlighting the importance of early education. Conclusions: The study underscores the need for streamlined and consistent guidelines to mitigate confusion among providers and patients. Further research is recommended to explore the objective impacts of guideline variability on screening practices and patient outcomes.
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.