ArticleJMIR cancer2022
Cancer Screening Recommendations During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Scoping Review.
Article in JMIR cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on lung cancer screening utilization and outcome: a health examination center retrospective study.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Strategies and challenges for maintaining the continuity of essential health services during a pandemic: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Resilience Gap in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Activity during the COVID-19 Pandemic in South Korea.Chonnam medical journal · 2024Article
- The role of facility and patient mix factors on recovery of screening and diagnostic mammography volumes following the initial COVID-19 pandemic wave.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Modifications in Primary Care Clinics to Continue Colorectal Cancer Screening Promotion During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Journal of community health · 2023Article
- Esophagogastroduodenoscopy Screening Intentions During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Japan: Web-Based Survey.JMIR cancer · 2022Article
- Reaching the "Hard-to-Reach" Sexual and Gender Diverse Communities for Population-Based Research in Cancer Prevention and Control: Methods for Online Survey Data Collection and Management.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Advancing the Science of Implementation for Resource-Limited Settings through Bidirectional Learning Around Cervical Cancer Screening.Ethnicity & disease · 2022Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCancer screening tests are recommended to prevent cancer-associated mortality by detecting precancerous and cancerous lesions in early stages. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the use of preventive health care services. Although there was an increase in the number of cancer screening tests beginning in late 2020, screenings remained 29% to 36% lower than in the prepandemic era.
objectiveThe aim of this review is to assist health care providers in identifying approaches for prioritizing patients and increasing breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening during the uncertainty of the COVID-19 pandemic.
methodsWe used the scoping review framework to identify articles on PubMed and EBSCO databases. A total of 403 articles were identified, and 23 articles were selected for this review. The literature review ranged from January 1, 2020, to September 30, 2021.
resultsThe articles included two primary categories of recommendations: (1) risk stratification and triage to prioritize screenings and (2) alternative methods to conduct cancer screenings. Risk stratification and triage recommendations focused on prioritizing high-risk patients with an abnormal or suspicious result on the previous screening test, patients in certain age groups and sex, patients with a personal medical or family cancer history, patients that are currently symptomatic, and patients that are predisposed to hereditary cancers and cancer-causing mutations. Other recommended strategies included identifying areas facing the most disparities, creating algorithms and using artificial intelligence to create cancer risk scores, leveraging in-person visits to assess cancer risk, and providing the option of open access screenings where patients can schedule screenings and can be assigned a priority category by health care staff. Some recommended using telemedicine to categorize patients and determine screening eligibility for patients with new complaints. Several articles noted the importance of implementing preventive measures such as COVID-19 screening prior to the procedures, maintaining hygiene measures, and social distancing in waiting rooms. Alternative screening methods that do not require an in-person clinic visit and can effectively screen patients for cancers included mailing self-collection sampling kits for cervical and colorectal cancers, and implementing or expanding mobile screening units.
conclusionsAlthough the COVID-19 pandemic had devastating effects on population health globally, it could be an opportunity to adapt and evolve cancer screening methods. Disruption often creates innovation, and focus on alternative methods for cancer screenings may help reach rural and underresourced areas after the pandemic has ended.
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.