ReviewClinical endoscopy2018
Colorectal Cancer Screening-Who, How, and When?
Review in Clinical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
54 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Advancements in Image-Based Analyses for Morphology and Staging of Colon Cancer: A Comprehensive Review.BioMed research international · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluating the potential impact of lifestyle-based behavior change interventions delivered at the time of colorectal cancer screening.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2024Pooled it
- Impact of an Abdominal Compression Bandage on the Completion of Colonoscopy for Obese Adults: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.Canadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology · 2022Trial
- Culturally-adapted behavioral intervention to improve colorectal cancer screening uptake among foreign-born South Asians in New Jersey: the Desi Sehat trial.Ethnicity & health · 2021Trial
- A guide to cancer screening.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Automatic metrics from a new colon phantom can ensure basic competency in colonoscopy.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Observational
- Molecular Basis, Diagnostic Approaches, and Therapeutic Strategies in Colorectal Cancer-Comprehensive Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Therapeutic Colorectal Cancer Vaccines: Emerging Modalities and Translational Opportunities.Vaccines · 2025Review
- Evaluating the implementation of colorectal cancer screening practices at King Abdul-Aziz Medical City, Riyadh.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2025Article
- The Value of Clinical Decision Support in Healthcare: A Focus on Screening and Early Detection.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Downregulation of solute carrier family 4 members 4 as a biomarker for colorectal cancer.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Accuracy of Faecal Matrix-Metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9) for Colorectal Cancer Detection in Makassar, Indonesia.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2025Article
- Efficacy and survival prognosis analysis of surgical resection combined with targeted therapy in patients with colorectal cancer liver metastasis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of a novel artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy system for adenoma detection: a prospective, propensity score-matched, non-randomized controlled study in Korea.Clinical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Article
- The Impact of Preoperative and Postoperative Nutritional Interventions on Treatment Outcomes and Quality of Life in Colorectal Cancer Patients-A Comprehensive Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Sociocultural and masculinity influences on colorectal cancer screening participation among Hispanic/Latino men in Florida, New York, and Texas.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Online cancer information seeking and colorectal cancer screening in China: Considering threat and coping Appraisals, and cancer fatalism.Preventive medicine reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Restrictive diets are unnecessary for colonoscopy: Non-inferiority randomized trial.Endoscopy international open · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide. It is amenable to screening as it occurs in premalignant, latent, early, and curable stages. PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and national and international CRC screening guidelines were searched for CRC screening methods, populations, and timing. CRC screening can use direct or indirect tests, delivered opportunistically or via organized programs. Most CRCs are diagnosed after 60 years of age; most screening programs apply to individuals 50-75 years of age. Screening may reduce disease-specific mortality by detecting CRC in earlier stages, and CRC incidence by detecting premalignant polyps, which can subsequently be removed. In randomized controlled trials (RCTs) guaiac fecal occult blood testing (gFOBt) was found to reduce CRC mortality by 13%-33%. Fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) has no RCT data comparing it to no screening, but is superior to gFOBt. Flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) trials demonstrated an 18% reduction in CRC incidence and a 28% reduction in CRC mortality. Currently, RCT evidence for colonoscopy screening is scarce. Although not yet corroborated by RCTs, it is likely that colonoscopy is the best screening modality for an individual. From a population perspective, organized programs are superior to opportunistic screening. However, no nation can offer organized population-wide colonoscopy screening. Thus, organized programs using cheaper modalities, such as FS/FIT, can be tailored to budget and capacity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.