ArticleThe Journal of surgical research2026
Understanding Colorectal Cancer Screening Gaps Among Adults Aged 45-49.
Article in The Journal of surgical research, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe United States Preventative Task Force recommends initiating colorectal cancer (CRC) screening at age 45, but screening rates among 45-49 y-olds has been lower than older age groups. Reasons for low screening rates among younger individuals are not clear.
methodsUsing Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data from 2022 to 2024, we investigated factors associated with CRC screening among adults aged 45-49; stratified analyses were conducted among the insured and uninsured. Among screened individuals, associations with undergoing endoscopy versus another screening modality were studied. We characterized preventative care behaviors including seeking primary care, time since last checkup, and completion of other age-appropriate cancer screening.
resultsOf 50,132 individuals, 21,566 (42.6%) underwent CRC screening. Those with primary care physicians had higher odds of screening (odds ratio = 1.71; 95% confidence interval = 1.47-1.98, ref: no primary care physician), but increasing time since one's last visit was associated with decreasing odds of screening at all time intervals (5+ y ago: odds ratio = 0.29; 95% confidence interval = 0.23-0.38, ref: <1 y). Lower income, rural residence, no insurance, and lower educational attainment were associated with lower odds of screening. CRC screening was completed in only 41.3% of women who had mammograms and 48% who were screened for cervical cancer.
conclusionsUptake of CRC screening lags in adults aged 45-49, with differences in socioeconomic factors and preventative care utilization. A majority of eligible but unscreened individuals accessed other age-appropriate cancer screening tests, directing focus to patient- and provider-specific factors as potential targets for intervention.
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.