Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41961114›Full record

ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2026

Mistrust and misinformation in a colorectal cancer care: rebuilding credibility in the digital age.

Ankita Kulkarni, Nikhil Pawa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ankita KulkarniColorectal and General Surgery, West Middlesex University Hospital, Chelsea and Westminster NHS FT, Twickenham Rd, Isleworth, TW7 6AF, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-6996-5141
Nikhil PawaDepartment of Bioengineering, Imperial College London, London, UK. npawa@nhs.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2122-0830

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mistrust in healthcare and the rapid spread of misinformation have become critical challenges in contemporary colorectal cancer (CRC) care. While diagnostic and therapeutic strategies have advanced, many patients now arrive at clinical appointments influenced by online narratives that distort risk, undermine screening, and question the intentions of clinicians and health systems. These dynamics are particularly evident among younger adults, who represent a growing proportion of CRC diagnoses and often rely on social media as a primary source of health information. This commentary explores how mistrust and misinformation intersect across the CRC continuum, from symptom interpretation and screening decisions to treatment acceptance and survivorship. It highlights how emotionally persuasive digital content can overshadow evidence-based guidance and complicate shared decision-making and delaying timely care. Addressing these challenges requires a deliberate shift in clinical communication: acknowledging uncertainty, engaging with cultural and digital contexts, and adopting a proactive presence in public information spaces. Strengthening trust is now inseparable from delivering high-quality CRC care and represents a collective responsibility for clinicians, institutions, and professional societies.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsCommunicationSocial MediaTrustDigital MediaEarly Detection of CancerHumansPhysician-Patient RelationsCancer screeningColorectal cancerDigital health communicationHealth misinformationMedical mistrustSocial media

Identifiers

PMID41961114
PMCPMC13180756

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.