The effects of test preference, test access, and navigation on colorectal cancer screening
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention, ISSN: 1055-9965, Vol: 23, Issue: 8, Page: 1521-1528
2014
- 12Citations
- 82Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations12
- Citation Indexes12
- 12
- CrossRef9
- Captures82
- Readers82
- 82
Article Description
Background: Little is known about how colorectal cancer screening test preferences operate together with test access and navigation to influence screening adherence in primary care. Methods: We analyzed data from a randomized trial of 945 primary care patients to assess the independent effects of screening test preference for fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or colonoscopy, mailed access to FIT and colonoscopy, and telephone navigation for FIT and colonoscopy, on screening. Results: Preference was not associated with overall screening, but individuals who preferred FIT were more likely to complete FIT screening (P = 0.005), whereas those who preferred colonoscopy were more likely to perform colonoscopy screening (P = 0.032). Mailed access to FIT and colonoscopy was associated with increased overall screening (OR = 2.6, P = 0.001), due to a 29-fold increase in FIT use. Telephone navigation was also associated with increased overall screening (OR = 2.1, P = 0.005), mainly due to a 3-fold increase in colonoscopy performance. We estimated that providing access and navigation for both screening tests may substantially increase screening compared with a preference-tailored approach, mainly due to increased performance of nonpreferred tests. Conclusions: Preference influences the type of screening tests completed. Test access increases FIT and navigation mainly increases colonoscopy. Screening strategies providing access and navigation to both tests may be more effective than preference-tailored approaches. Impact: Preference tailoring in colorectal cancer screening strategies should be avoided if the objective is to maximize screening rates, although other factors (e.g., costs, necessary follow-up) should also be considered. © 2014 American Association for Cancer Research.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84903901971&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.epi-13-1176; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24813819; http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/cgi/doi/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-13-1176; https://syndication.highwire.org/content/doi/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-13-1176; https://aacrjournals.org/cebp/article/23/8/1521/14210/The-Effects-of-Test-Preference-Test-Access-and; https://dx.doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.epi-13-1176; https://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/23/8/1521
American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know