Trial reportNature medicine2026
Colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing versus usual care in diagnostic colorectal cancer screening: the SCREESCO randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Nature medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Large-scale esophageal cancer screening through noncontrast computed tomography and artificial intelligence.Nature medicine · 2026Article
- A Bayesian bivariate spatial modeling framework for stage-specific cancer incidence and targeting of screening efforts.American journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- European Cancer Prevention Organization on cancer screening: an expert panel position paper.European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP) · 2026Article
- Organised Colorectal Cancer Screening and Changes in Mortality and Incidence Trends: A Population-Based Study.Cancers · 2026Article
- Interpretable Machine Learning Models Based on Blood Cell-Derived Inflammatory Indices for Identifying Colorectal Neoplasia: A Retrospective Study.Journal of inflammation research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There is a need to quantify the benefits and harms of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening using primary colonoscopy or fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) compared with usual care with no screening. Guidelines recommend screening in individuals aged 50-75 years using colonoscopy or FIT, and many screening programs use one-sample biennial FIT. Here we compare incidence of diagnosed CRCs and gastrointestinal and cardiovascular events between screening and usual care during the diagnostic phase of the SCREESCO trial. A randomized block method (no masking) assigned 278,280 individuals aged 60 years to once-only colonoscopy, 2 rounds of two-stool FIT with a low cutoff (10 μg g
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.