Using primary care-based paper and telephone interventions to increase uptake of bowel scope screening in Yorkshire: a protocol of a randomised controlled trial
Evidence suggests bowel scope screening (BSS) can significantly reduce an individual's risk of developing colorectal cancer (CRC). BSS for 55 year olds was therefore introduced to the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) in 2013. However, the benefits are only gained from test completion and uptake is low (43%). Primary care involvement has consistently shown benefits to cancer screening uptake and so this study aims to build on this knowledge and evaluate general practitioner (GP) practice led interventions designed to increase BSS attendance.
A three-arm randomised controlled trial will be conducted to evaluate three interventions: one intervention for prospective BSS invitees (primer letter with locally tailored leaflet sent by an individual's GP practice) and two interventions for those who do not attend their BSS appointment (a self-referral letter sent by an individual's GP practice and a patient navigation call made on behalf of an individual's GP practice). The trial will be set in Yorkshire. Individuals soon to receive their invitation to attend BSS at one of the Hull and East Yorkshire Bowel Cancer Screening centre sites, will be randomly assigned to one of three groups: control (usual care; no input from GP practice), Intervention group A (primer letter/leaflet and a self-referral letter), Intervention group B (primer letter/leaflet and a patient navigation call). Attendance data will be obtained from the BCSP database (via National Health Service (NHS) Digital) 3 months after the last intervention. Regression analysis will compare uptake, and additional clinical outcomes, across the three groups. The analysis will be multivariate and adjust for several covariates including gender and area-level deprivation.
NHS ethical approval has been obtained from London-Harrow Research Ethics Committee. The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences.
ISRCTN16252122; Pre-results.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 05 October 2018.
All research outputs
#9,935,481
of 32,950,043 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Open
#13,486
of 29,164 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,287
of 362,378 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Open
#274
of 588 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,950,043 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,164 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 362,378 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 588 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
