ArticleCureus2026
Association Between Patient-Provider Relationship Quality and Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake Among US Adults.
Article in Cureus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient-provider relationship (PPR) quality may influence colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake, yet national-level evidence remains limited. This study examined the association between PPR quality and CRC screening among US adults. This retrospective cross-sectional study used nationally representative data from the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) 2018-2020 cycles. The analytic sample included 7,732 adults aged 45-75 years. Weighted descriptive analyses, chi-square tests, and multivariable logistic regression were conducted. Overall, 5,771 (76.2%) participants reported ever having completed a CRC screening test. Screening prevalence was 75.5% (n = 3,999) during the pre-COVID period and 77.9% (n = 1,772) during the COVID period. Screening uptake was lowest among adults aged 45-54 years (n = 908, 47.7%), compared with adults aged 55-64 years (n = 2,252, 81.7%) and 65-75 years (n = 2,611, 89.6%). Most respondents reported high PPR quality (n = 5,248, 82.8%). After adjustment, lower PPR quality was associated with reduced CRC screening uptake (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.59-0.86). Lower emotional support (aOR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.59-0.89) and reduced shared decision-making (aOR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.56-0.89) were also associated with decreased screening uptake. Asian (aOR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.17-0.87) and Hispanic (aOR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.22-0.53) respondents reported lower PPR quality than non-Hispanic Whites. Lower PPR quality was associated with decreased CRC screening uptake. Strengthening supportive and culturally responsive patient-provider interactions may improve CRC screening participation and reduce disparities in preventive cancer care.
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.