Patterns of Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake among Men and Women in the United States

By H. Meissner, N. Breen, C. Klabunde, S. Vernon. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention, 2006

610 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Oncology, Pathology and Forensic Medicine

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/20576ff67fe9362d1f38787de535d7d185db9001

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Oncology

1. A. Jemal
2. R. Siegel
3. K. Miller
4. Elizabeth E. Ward
5. C. DeSantis
6. Melissa M. Center
7. S. Fedewa
8. F. Bray

In Pathology and Forensic Medicine

1. A. Jemal
2. R. Siegel

Citations in the corpus

• Worldwide burden of colorectal cancer: a review (2016, background): “variability are not completely understood, but likely reflect complex interactions between sex-specific exposure to risk factors and protective effects of both endogenous and exogenous hormones as well as gender-specific differences in screening practices [24, 25].”
• Colorectal cancer statistics, 2014 (2014, background): “The reasons for higher rates in men are not completely understood, but likely reflect etiologic factors related to complex interactions between sex hormones and risk factor exposures, as well as differences in screening behavior for those aged 50 years and older.(17,18) Incidence and mortality rates”
• International Trends in Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rates (2009, background): “In the United States, joint colorectal cancer screening recommendations were first released in 1997 (18) although guidelines for opportunistic screening have been utilized since the early 1980s (19); between 1987 and 2003, screening rates increased from approximately 27% to approximately 45% (20).”
• Colorectal cancer statistics, 2017 (2017, background): “Reasons for higher rates in men are not completely understood but to some extent likely reflect differences in exposures to risk factors and sex hormones, as well as complex interactions between these influences.(21,22)”
• Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. (2008, background): “124 –126 High-quality CSPY depends on (1) appropriate training and experience; (2) proper documentation of risk assessment; (3) complete exam to the cecum with adequate mucosal visualization and bowel preparation; (4) ability to detect and remove polyps safely; (5) documentation of polypoid lesions ”
• Screening and Surveillance for the Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer and Adenomatous Polyps, 2008: A Joint Guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi‐Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology * † (2008, background): “124 –126 High-quality CSPY depends on (1) appropriate training and experience; (2) proper documentation of risk assessment; (3) complete exam to the cecum with adequate mucosal visualization and bowel preparation; (4) ability to detect and remove polyps safely; (5) documentation of polypoid lesions ”
• Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer, 1975–2006, Featuring Colorectal Trends and Impact of Interventions (Risk Factors, Screening, and Treatment) to Reduce Future Rates (2010, background): “Klabunde, unpublished data).(70,71,78-80) Research is ongoing regarding the most effective screening methods, individuals most at risk, and optimal surveillance intervals.”