The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Patterns and predictors of colorectal cancer test use in the adult U.S. population
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Screening is effective in reducing the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer. Rates of colorectal cancer test use continue to be low. METHODS: The authors analyzed data from the National Health Interview Survey concerning the use of the home‐administered fecal occult blood test (FOBT) and sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy/proctoscopy to estimate current rates of colorectal cancer test use and to identify factors associated with the use or nonuse of tests. RESULTS: In 2000, 17.1% of respondents reported undergoing a home FOBT within the past year, 33.9% reported undergoing an endoscopy within the previous 10 years, and 42.5% reported undergoing either test within the recommended time intervals. The use of colorectal cancer tests varied by gender, race, ethnicity, age, education, income, health care coverage, and having a usual source of care. Having seen a physician within the past year had the strongest association with test use. Lack of awareness and lack of physician recommendation were the most commonly reported barriers to undergoing such tests. CONCLUSIONS: Less than half of the U.S. population age ≥ 50 years underwent colorectal cancer tests within the recommended time intervals. Educational initiatives for patients and providers regarding the importance of colorectal cancer screening, efforts to reduce disparities in test use, and ensuring that all persons have access to routine primary care may help increase screening rates. Cancer 2004. © 2004 American Cancer Society.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Compendium of physical activities: an update of activity codes and MET intensities
AINSWORTH, B. E., HASKELL, W. L., WHITT, M. C., IRWIN, M. L., SWARTZ, A. M., STRATH, S. J., O???BRIEN, W. L., BASSETT, D. R., SCHMITZ, K. H., EMPLAINCOURT, P. O., et al. (2000) · Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · doi:10.1097/00005768-200009001-00009 · Cited by 8,497
Physical Activity and Health: A Report of the Surgeon General: (525162010-001)
(1995) · PsycEXTRA Dataset · doi:10.1037/e525162010-001 · Cited by 5,479
Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume II – The Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies
Juul, S. (1989) · Scandinavian Journal of Social Medicine · doi:10.1177/140349488901700214 · Cited by 3,592
Reducing Mortality from Colorectal Cancer by Screening for Fecal Occult Blood
Mandel, J. S., Bond, J. H., Church, T. R., Snover, D. C., Bradley, G. M., Schuman, L. M., & Ederer, F. (1993) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199305133281901 · Cited by 3,229
Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer
Hardcastle, J. D., Chamberlain, J. O., Robinson, M. H., Moss, S. M., Amar, S. S., Balfour, T. W., James, P. D., & Mangham, C. M. (1996) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(96)03386-7 · Cited by 2,793
Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test
Kronborg, O., Fenger, C., Olsen, J., Jørgensen, O. D., & Søndergaard, O. (1996) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(96)03430-7 · Cited by 2,501
A Case–Control Study of Screening Sigmoidoscopy and Mortality from Colorectal Cancer
Selby, J. V., Friedman, G. D., Quesenberry, C. P., & Weiss, N. S. (1992) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199203053261001 · Cited by 1,702
Colorectal cancer screening: Clinical guidelines and rationale
Winawer, S., Fletcher, R., Miller, L., Godlee, F., Stolar, M., Mulrow, C., Woolf, S., Glick, S., Ganiats, T., Bond, J., et al. (1997) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/gast.1997.v112.agast970594 · Cited by 1,612
The Effect of Fecal Occult-Blood Screening on the Incidence of Colorectal Cancer
Mandel, J. S., Church, T. R., Bond, J. H., Ederer, F., Geisser, M. S., Mongin, S. J., Snover, D. C., & Schuman, L. M. (2000) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200011303432203 · Cited by 1,423
The design and analysis of cohort studies
Breslow, N. E., & Day, N. E. (1987) · International Agency for Research on Cancer eBooks · Cited by 1,312
Cited by
Edwards, B. K., Ward, E., Kohler, B. A., Eheman, C., Zauber, A. G., Anderson, R. N., Jemal, A., Schymura, M. J., Lansdorp‐Vogelaar, I., Seeff, L. C., et al. (2010) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.24760 · Cited by 2,002
Self-citationDubé, C., Rostom, A., Lewin, G., Tsertsvadze, A., Barrowman, N., Code, C., Sampson, M., & Moher, D. (2007) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-146-5-200703060-00009 · Cited by 334
Patient-Reported Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening
Jones, R. M., Devers, K. J., Kuzel, A. J., & Woolf, S. H. (2010) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2010.01.021 · Cited by 324
Baron, R. C., Melillo, S., Rimer, B. K., Coates, R. J., Kerner, J., Habarta, N., Chattopadhyay, S., Sabatino, S. A., Elder, R., & Leeks, K. J. (2010) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2009.09.031 · Cited by 163
Self-citationThe Relative Importance of Patient-Reported Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening
Jones, R. M., Woolf, S. H., Cunningham, T. D., Johnson, R. E., Krist, A. H., Rothemich, S. F., & Vernon, S. W. (2010) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2010.01.020 · Cited by 150
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Seeff, L. C., Nadel, M. R., Klabunde, C. N., Thompson, T., Shapiro, J. A., Vernon, S. W., & Coates, R. J.
- Venue
- Cancer
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-04-20
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 2093-2103
- ISSN
- 0008-543X (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0142
- OpenAlex
- W2036371678
- Cited by
- 538
- References
- 28
- FWCI
- 17.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Patterns and predictors of colorectal cancer test use in the adult U.S. population. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/cncr.20276
- The paper
- Seeff, L. C., Nadel, M. R., Klabunde, C. N., Thompson, T., Shapiro, J. A., Vernon, S. W., & Coates, R. J. (2004). Patterns and predictors of colorectal cancer test use in the adult U.S. population. Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.20276
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
