000289944 001__ 289944
000289944 005__ 20250819102225.0
000289944 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1016/j.lanepe.2024.100920
000289944 0247_ $$2altmetric$$aaltmetric:162981901
000289944 037__ $$aDKFZ-2024-00926
000289944 041__ $$aEnglish
000289944 082__ $$a610
000289944 1001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)1049700ad82fc8a751f5d80a4314473f$$aOla, Idris$$b0$$eFirst author$$udkfz
000289944 245__ $$aUtilization of colorectal cancer screening tests across European countries: a cross-sectional analysis of the European health interview survey 2018–2020
000289944 260__ $$a[Amsterdam]$$bElsevier$$c2024
000289944 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000289944 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000289944 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1714720542_10175
000289944 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000289944 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000289944 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000289944 500__ $$a#EA:C070#LA:C070#LA:C120#
000289944 520__ $$aBackground:Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has been shown to reduce CRC incidence and mortality, and most European countries have started to implement CRC screening programs in the past 20 years. Consequently, this study aimed to estimate the utilization of fecal tests and colonoscopy, as well as investigate factors associated with their utilization based on specific screening program characteristics in European countries.Methods:We analyzed data from the European Health Interview Survey 2018–2020 to determine the utilization of fecal tests [guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) or fecal immunochemical test (FIT)] within the preceding 2 years or colonoscopy within the preceding 10 years among people aged 50–74 years, based on the type of screening offered in each country. Using multivariable logistic regression and sub-group meta-analysis, factors associated with screening use were determined.Findings:The analyses included data from 129,750 respondents across 29 European countries, with participant counts ranging from 1511 individuals in Iceland to 11,755 individuals in Germany. Unit response rates ranged from 22% to 88%. The use of either test was highest among countries with fully rolled-out programs with fecal tests [from 37.7% (867/2379) in Croatia to 74.9% (2321/3085) in Denmark] and in countries offering colonoscopy as an alternative screening method [from 26.2% (854/3329) in Greece to 75.4% (1192/1760) in Luxembourg]. We observed the lowest utilization of either test in countries with no program or small-scale programs [6.3% (195/3179) in Bulgaria to 34.2% (722/2144) in Latvia]. Across all types of screening offers, younger age, being without a partner, low education, rural residence, and living in large households were associated with lower utilization, as were poor lifestyle scores and prolonged periods without physician consultation.Interpretation:Our findings point to large disparities and much room for improvement in CRC screening offers and utilization across Europe.
000289944 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-313$$a313 - Krebsrisikofaktoren und Prävention (POF4-313)$$cPOF4-313$$fPOF IV$$x0
000289944 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef, Journals: inrepo02.dkfz.de
000289944 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aCardoso, Rafael$$b1
000289944 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)6c5d058b7552d071a7fa4c5e943fff0f$$aHoffmeister, Michael$$b2$$udkfz
000289944 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)90d5535ff896e70eed81f4a4f6f22ae2$$aBrenner, Hermann$$b3$$eLast author$$udkfz
000289944 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)3055963-7$$a10.1016/j.lanepe.2024.100920$$gVol. 41, p. 100920 -$$p100920$$tThe lancet / Regional health. Europe$$v41$$x2666-7762$$y2024
000289944 8564_ $$uhttps://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/289944/files/1-s2.0-S2666776224000875-main.pdf
000289944 8564_ $$uhttps://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/289944/files/1-s2.0-S2666776224000875-main.pdf?subformat=pdfa$$xpdfa
000289944 8767_ $$8E-2024-00545-b$$92024-08-22$$d2024-12-27$$eAPC$$jZahlung erfolgt
000289944 909CO $$ooai:inrepo02.dkfz.de:289944$$popenCost$$pOpenAPC$$pVDB
000289944 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)1049700ad82fc8a751f5d80a4314473f$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b0$$kDKFZ
000289944 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-HGF)0$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b1$$kDKFZ
000289944 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)6c5d058b7552d071a7fa4c5e943fff0f$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b2$$kDKFZ
000289944 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)90d5535ff896e70eed81f4a4f6f22ae2$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b3$$kDKFZ
000289944 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-313$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF4-310$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF4-300$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF4$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$aDE-HGF$$bGesundheit$$lKrebsforschung$$vKrebsrisikofaktoren und Prävention$$x0
000289944 9141_ $$y2024
000289944 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0100$$2StatID$$aJCR$$bLANCET REG HEALTH-EU : 2022$$d2023-10-27
000289944 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0200$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bSCOPUS$$d2023-10-27
000289944 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0300$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bMedline$$d2023-10-27
000289944 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0320$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bPubMed Central$$d2023-10-27
000289944 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0501$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ Seal$$d2023-04-12T14:52:56Z
000289944 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0500$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ$$d2023-04-12T14:52:56Z
000289944 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0030$$2StatID$$aPeer Review$$bDOAJ : Anonymous peer review$$d2023-04-12T14:52:56Z
000289944 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0199$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bClarivate Analytics Master Journal List$$d2023-10-27
000289944 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1050$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bBIOSIS Previews$$d2023-10-27
000289944 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1190$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bBiological Abstracts$$d2023-10-27
000289944 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0112$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bEmerging Sources Citation Index$$d2023-10-27
000289944 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0150$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bWeb of Science Core Collection$$d2023-10-27
000289944 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)9920$$2StatID$$aIF >= 20$$bLANCET REG HEALTH-EU : 2022$$d2023-10-27
000289944 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0561$$2StatID$$aArticle Processing Charges$$d2023-10-27
000289944 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0700$$2StatID$$aFees$$d2023-10-27
000289944 915pc $$0PC:(DE-HGF)0000$$2APC$$aAPC keys set
000289944 915pc $$0PC:(DE-HGF)0001$$2APC$$aLocal Funding
000289944 915pc $$0PC:(DE-HGF)0002$$2APC$$aDFG OA Publikationskosten
000289944 915pc $$0PC:(DE-HGF)0125$$2APC$$aDEAL: Elsevier 09/01/2023
000289944 915pc $$0PC:(DE-HGF)0003$$2APC$$aDOAJ Journal
000289944 9202_ $$0I:(DE-He78)C070-20160331$$kC070$$lC070 Klinische Epidemiologie und Alternf.$$x0
000289944 9202_ $$0I:(DE-He78)C120-20160331$$kC120$$lPräventive Onkologie$$x1
000289944 9200_ $$0I:(DE-He78)C070-20160331$$kC070$$lC070 Klinische Epidemiologie und Alternf.$$x0
000289944 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)C070-20160331$$kC070$$lC070 Klinische Epidemiologie und Alternf.$$x0
000289944 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)C120-20160331$$kC120$$lPräventive Onkologie$$x1
000289944 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)HD01-20160331$$kHD01$$lDKTK HD zentral$$x2
000289944 980__ $$ajournal
000289944 980__ $$aVDB
000289944 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)C070-20160331
000289944 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)C120-20160331
000289944 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)HD01-20160331
000289944 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED
000289944 980__ $$aAPC