Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2021 Jul 15;149(2):316-326.
doi: 10.1002/ijc.33589. Epub 2021 Apr 17.

Measures of longitudinal adherence to fecal-based colorectal cancer screening: Literature review and recommended approaches

Affiliations
Review

Measures of longitudinal adherence to fecal-based colorectal cancer screening: Literature review and recommended approaches

V Paul Doria-Rose et al. Int J Cancer. .

Abstract

The success of fecal occult blood-based colorectal cancer screening programs is dependent on repeating screening at short intervals (ie, every 1-2 years). We conducted a literature review to assess measures that have been used to assess longitudinal adherence to fecal-based screening. Among 46 citations identified and included in this review, six broad classifications of longitudinal adherence were identified: (a) stratified single-round attendance, (b) all possible adherence permutations, (c) consistent/inconsistent/never attendance, (d) number of times attended, (e) program adherence and (f) proportion of time covered. Advantages and disadvantages of these measures are described, and recommendations on which measures to use based on data availability and scientific question are also given. Stratified single round attendance is particularly useful for describing the yield of screening, while programmatic adherence measures are best suited to evaluating screening efficacy. We recommend that screening programs collect detailed longitudinal, individual-level data, not only for the screening tests themselves but additionally for diagnostic follow-up and surveillance exams, to allow for maximum flexibility in reporting adherence patterns using the measure of choice.

Keywords: colorectal cancer; fecal immunochemical testing; fecal occult blood testing; longitudinal adherence; screening.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. IARC. Colorectal cancer screening. IARC Handb Cancer Prev. 2019;17:1-300. http://publications.iarc.fr/573.
    1. Bibbins-Domingo K, Grossman DC, Curry SJ, et al. Screening for colorectal cancer: US preventive services task force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2016;315:2564-2575.
    1. Knudsen AB, Zauber AG, Rutter CM, et al. Estimation of benefits, burden, and harms of colorectal cancer screening strategies: modeling study for the US preventive services task force. JAMA. 2016;315:2595-2609.
    1. Zapka J, Taplin SH, Price RA, Cranos C, Yabroff R. Factors in quality care-the case of follow-up to abnormal cancer screening tests-problems in the steps and interfaces of care. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2010;2010:58-71.
    1. Inadomi JM, Vijan S, Janz NK, et al. Adherence to colorectal cancer screening: a randomized clinical trial of competing strategies. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172:575-582.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources