Observational studyCancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center
Clinical Diagnosis Codes Identify Patients Unlikely to Receive Orders for Fecal Immunochemical Tests.
Observational study in Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center. 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
- Update of
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
IntroductionAutomated colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs often invite all age-eligible patients for fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), but providers may defer screening in clinically complex patients. However, such nuanced decisions are not captured by most automated systems. We evaluated whether International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes are associated with variations in FIT ordering patterns beyond age-based outreach criteria.MethodsIn a retrospective observational study of 15,020 screening-eligible patients aged 50-75, we compared the frequency of ICD-10 codes between patients with and without a FIT order. We repeated the analysis restricted to those with a Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI)<5.ResultsOverall, 4,833 (32.2%) patients did not have a FIT order. Of the 1,215 ICD-10 codes examined, 96 were significantly associated with the absence of a FIT order (p<0.05). These codes frequently indicated digestive diseases (e.g., colonic neoplasm, diverticular disease), advanced comorbidities (e.g., frailty, paralysis), and acute conditions (e.g., fractures, severe infections). Among the patients with CCI<5, 41 codes were associated with the absence of a FIT order (p<0.05), such as heart failure and chronic kidney disease.ConclusionScreening-eligible patients without a FIT order were more likely to have ICD-10 codes reflecting digestive diseases, chronic comorbidities, and acute conditions. These findings demonstrate that specific diagnostic profiles are associated with real-world FIT ordering patterns, highlighting the need for further investigation into how comorbidities and competing clinical priorities relate to CRC screening decisions.
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.