Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34217420›Full record

ArticlePreventive medicine2021

Early assessment of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer screening services: The International Cancer Screening Network COVID-19 survey.

Douglas M Puricelli Perin, K Miriam Elfström, Jean-Luc Bulliard, Andrea Burón, Christine Campbell, Anath A Flugelman, Livia Giordano, Aruna Kamineni, Antonio Ponti, Linda Rabeneck and 4 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Preventive medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Impacts of a Public Health Emergency on Cancer Testing Rates, Follow-up, and Cancer Diagnosis: An Evaluation of the COVID-19 Pandemic.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Development and initial psychometric evaluation of a COVID-related psychosocial experiences questionnaire for cancer survivors.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

14 authors at 12 institutions in 9 countries.

Douglas M Puricelli PerinClinical Monitoring Research Program Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD, USA. Electronic address: douglas.puricelliperin@nih.gov.
K Miriam ElfströmDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; Regional Cancer Center of Stockholm Gotland, Stockholm, Sweden.
Jean-Luc BulliardCenter for Primary Care and Public Health (unisanté), University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Andrea BurónEpidemiology and Evaluation Department, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain; IMIM (Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute), Barcelona, Spain; REDISSEC (Health Services Research on Chronic Patients Network), Madrid, Spain.
Christine CampbellUsher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Anath A FlugelmanDepartment of Community Medicine and Epidemiology, Lady Davis Carmel Medical Center, Haifa, Israel; Ruth and Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel; Clalit National Cancer Control Center, Haifa, Israel.
Livia GiordanoSSD Epidemiologia e screening - CPO, University Hospital 'Città della Salute e della Scienza', Turin, Italy.
Aruna KamineniKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Antonio PontiSSD Epidemiologia e screening - CPO, University Hospital 'Città della Salute e della Scienza', Turin, Italy.
Linda RabeneckPrevention and Cancer Control, Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Mona SaraiyaDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Robert A SmithAmerican Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Mireille J M BroedersRadboud university medical center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Dutch Expert Centre for Screening, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
International Cancer Screening Network
Azienda Ospedaliera Citta' della Salute e della Scienza di Torino · ITAmerican Cancer Society · USCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · USCentre universitaire de médecine générale et santé publique, Lausanne · CHFrederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research · USKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute · USKarolinska Institutet · SERadboud University Medical Center · NLSpanish Clinical Research Network · ESTechnion – Israel Institute of Technology · ILUniversity of Edinburgh · GBUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

PROSPR METRICS CISNET Collaboration Investigating Impact of Structural Racism/Discrimination on Cervical Screening Moonshot SupplementUM1CA221940 · NCI · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI CHUBAK, JESSICA, HAAS, JENNIFER S · 2018 to 2023
$15.9M
Optimizing Colorectal Cancer Screening PREcision and Outcomes in CommunIty-baSEd Populations (PRECISE)UM1CA222035 · NCI · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI CHUBAK, JESSICA, CORLEY, DOUGLAS ALLEN · 2018 to 2023
$15.6M
NCI NIH HHS UM1 CA221940NCI NIH HHS UM1 CA222035
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Screening can decrease the burden of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers. The COVID-19 pandemic led many countries to suspend cancer screening services as part of their response to the pandemic. The International Cancer Screening Network (ICSN) carried out an online survey to assess the effects of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer screening. A 33-item survey was distributed to 834 email addresses to gather information about settings and assess decision-making processes that led to cancer screening suspension. Information about communication, impact on resources, and patient follow-up was collected. Quantitative data was analyzed as frequencies overall and by setting, while a comment section under each survey item captured nuanced details. Responses were recategorized into 66 settings, representing 35 countries. Most settings suspended cancer screening services (n = 60, 90.9%) in March 2020 (n = 45, 68.2%), guided by a government decision (n = 51, 77.3%). Few settings made the decision whether to suspend services based on a preparedness plan (n = 17, 25.8%). In most settings, professionals were reassigned (n = 41, 62.1%) and infrastructure repurposed (n = 35, 53.0%). The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic has had profound effects on cancer screening worldwide, including the suspension of services in almost all settings. Most settings were unprepared to deal with the scale of the pandemic but demonstrated flexibility in the response. These results contribute to inform, through experiences and lessons learned, the next steps for the global cancer screening community to further evaluate the impact of COVID-19 and prepare for future disruptions.

Indexed as

COVID-19NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Surveys and QuestionnairesCancer screeningCOVID-19DisruptionHealth care services

Identifiers

PMID34217420
PMCPMC8241661
OpenAlexW3173719178

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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 Socratic graph.