ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2026
Protocol for a pragmatic trial comparing navigator and automated virtual interventions for guaranteeing adherence to fecal immunochemical testing (NAVIGATE-FIT).
Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) - a non-invasive colorectal cancer (CRC) screening method offers an opportunity to bridge CRC screening gaps in underserved settings. The effectiveness of FIT as a screening tool, however, is limited by low return rates of stool samples. Patient navigation has been demonstrated to successfully improve FIT return rates in randomized trial settings, however, in real-world settings, navigation may not achieve the same impact due to resource constraints. Text-based reminders offer a low-cost alternative to patient navigation to facilitate FIT test returns. In the NAVIGATE-FIT project, we seek to use rapid randomized testing to compare a text-based intervention to patient navigation in a quality improvement effort assessing if a text-based reminder program is non-inferior to patient navigation to improve FIT return rates in a safety-net hospital system. Methods: We will randomize primary care patients (English- or Spanish-speaking) due for CRC screening at Boston Medical Center (BMC) with an unreturned FIT test (ordered 30-37 days prior) to either a text messaging system (Artera) or patient navigation. Artera is an artificial intelligence enabled system which has been programmed with conversation text flows to facilitate FIT test returns. The patient navigation arm will prioritize patients with overdue FIT tests for a navigation phone call the week of randomization. Outcomes will be assessed in accordance with the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (REAIM) framework, and the project has been powered based on the effectiveness outcome of percentage of patients with a completed FIT test within 30 days of randomization. We have selected a non-inferiority margin of 13% on the risk difference scale and anticipate 80% power with inclusion of 196 patients in each arm. Primary analysis will be intention-to-treat. The primary project goal is to generate local knowledge to select a strategy to improve screening at BMC. Conclusions: The NAVIGATE-FIT project is well-positioned to test the hypothesis that a conversational text-based reminder and follow-up system is non-inferior to the current usual care patient navigation system at BMC, a large, academic, urban, safety-net hospital, for improving return rates of FIT screening tests. This protocol can serve as a model to other health systems seeking to undertake randomized quality improvement projects.
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.