↓ Skip to main content

Association Between Primary Care Visits and Colorectal Cancer Screening Outcomes in the Era of Population Health Outreach

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
26 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
13 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
Title
Association Between Primary Care Visits and Colorectal Cancer Screening Outcomes in the Era of Population Health Outreach
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, June 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11606-016-3760-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ethan A. Halm, Elisabeth F. Beaber, Dale McLerran, Jessica Chubak, Douglas A. Corley, Carolyn M. Rutter, Chyke A. Doubeni, Jennifer S. Haas, Bijal A. Balasubramanian

Abstract

Population outreach strategies are increasingly used to improve colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The influence of primary care on cancer screening in this context is unknown. To assess associations between primary care provider (PCP) visits and receipt of CRC screening and colonoscopy after a positive fecal immunochemical (FIT) or fecal occult blood test (FOBT). Population-based cohort study. A total of 968,072 patients ages 50-74 years who were not up to date with CRC screening in 2011 in four integrated healthcare systems (three with screening outreach programs using FIT kits) in the Population-Based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens (PROSPR) consortium. Demographic, clinical, PCP visit, and CRC screening data were obtained from electronic health records and administrative databases. We examined associations between PCP visits in 2011 and receipt of FIT/FOBT, screening colonoscopy, or flexible sigmoidoscopy (CRC screening) in 2012 and follow-up colonoscopy within 3 months of a positive FIT/FOBT in 2012. We used multivariable logistic regression and propensity score models to adjust for confounding. Fifty-eight percent of eligible patients completed a CRC screening test in 2012, most by FIT. Those with a greater number of PCP visits had higher rates of CRC screening at all sites. Patients with ≥1 PCP visit had nearly twice the adjusted-odds of CRC screening (OR = 1.88, 95 % CI: 1.86-1.89). Overall, 79.6 % of patients with a positive FIT/FOBT completed colonoscopy within 3 months. Patients with ≥1 PCP visit had 30 % higher adjusted odds of completing colonoscopy after positive FIT/FOBT (OR = 1.30; 95 % CI: 1.22-1.40). Patients with a greater number of PCP visits had higher rates of both incident CRC screening and colonoscopy after positive FIT/FOBT, even in health systems with active population health outreach programs. In this era of virtual care and population outreach, primary care visits remain an important mechanism for engaging patients in cancer screening.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Unknown 83 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 19%
Student > Master 14 16%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Librarian 5 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 26 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 14%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Psychology 3 3%
Computer Science 3 3%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 30 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 198. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 May 2022.
All research outputs
#198,396
of 25,349,102 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#170
of 8,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,819
of 348,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#4
of 110 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,349,102 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,165 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 348,704 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 110 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.