% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Gruner:163024,
      author       = {L. Gruner$^*$ and M. Hoffmeister$^*$ and L. Ludwig and S.
                      Meny and H. Brenner$^*$},
      title        = {{T}he {E}ffects of {D}iffering {I}nvitation {M}odels on the
                      {U}ptake of {I}mmunological {F}ecal {O}ccult {B}lood
                      {T}esting.},
      journal      = {Deutsches Ärzteblatt international},
      volume       = {117},
      number       = {25},
      issn         = {1866-0452},
      address      = {Köln},
      publisher    = {Dt. Ärzte-Verl.},
      reportid     = {DKFZ-2020-01815},
      pages        = {423-430},
      year         = {2020},
      note         = {#EA:C070#LA:C070#},
      abstract     = {Participation rates in colorectal cancer screening in
                      Germany are low. We therefore investigated the effectiveness
                      of different invitation models for immunological stool blood
                      tests (fecal immunological tests, FITs).A randomized
                      controlled trial in 50- to 54-year-old clients of the health
                      insurance provider AOK Baden-Wuerttemberg. A total of 17 532
                      insured persons were randomized to receive: (A) an
                      invitation letter including a FIT (n = 5850); (B) an
                      invitation letter including an option to request a FIT (n =
                      5844); or (C) an invitation letter only (n = 5838; control
                      group, routine practice). Reminder letters were sent to half
                      the members of groups A and B, selected at random, after 4
                      weeks. The primary endpoint was the use of a FIT within 1
                      year of the date of the invitation letter. IRRID:
                      RR2-10.2196/16413. Registration: DRKS00011858.The invitation
                      letter with a FIT enclosed (A) increased usage from $10\%$
                      to $29.7\%$ compared with the control group $(+19.7\%$
                      points, p < 0.0001; men: $+19.4\%,$ women: $+18.8\%).$ The
                      invitation letter with a FIT request option (B) increased
                      usage from $10\%$ to $27.7\%$ $(+17.7\%$ points, p < 0.0001;
                      men: $+17.7\%,$ women: $+17.4\%).$ Reminders increased usage
                      in group A by $7.5\%$ points and in group B by $8.5\%$
                      points. Participation among women was higher than among men
                      in all groups. The FIT positivity rate was $6.9\%.$ A
                      subsequent colonoscopy was reported for $64.3\%$ of
                      FIT-positive participants, and advanced neoplasia was found
                      in $21.3\%$ of these cases.Letters of invitation that
                      include a FIT and those that offer low-threshold access to a
                      FIT achieve strong, comparable increases in the usage of FIT
                      in the context of colorectal cancer screening.},
      cin          = {C070 / C120 / HD01},
      ddc          = {610},
      cid          = {I:(DE-He78)C070-20160331 / I:(DE-He78)C120-20160331 /
                      I:(DE-He78)HD01-20160331},
      pnm          = {313 - Cancer risk factors and prevention (POF3-313)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-313},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      pubmed       = {pmid:32885780},
      doi          = {10.3238/arztebl.2020.0423},
      url          = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/163024},
}