Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 173

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The NordICC Study: Rationale and design of a randomized trial on colonoscopy screening for colorectal cancer

Open access
Kaminski, M., Bretthauer, M., Zauber, A., Kuipers, E., Adami, H.-O., van Ballegooijen, M., Regula, J., van Leerdam, M., Stefansson, T., Påhlman, L., Dekker, E., Hernán, M., Garborg, K., Hoff, G., for the NordICC Study Group·2012·Endoscopy

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM: While colonoscopy screening is widely used in several European countries and the United States, there are no randomized trials to quantify its benefits. The Nordic-European Initiative on Colorectal Cancer (NordICC) is a multinational, randomized controlled trial aiming at investigating the effect of colonoscopy screening on colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality. This paper describes the rationale and design of the NordICC trial. STUDY DESIGN: Men and women aged 55 to 64 years are drawn from the population registries in the participating countries and randomly assigned to either once-only colonoscopy screening with removal of all detected lesions, or no screening (standard of care in the trial regions). All individuals are followed for 15 years after inclusion using dedicated national registries. The primary end points of the trial are cumulative CRC-specific death and CRC incidence during 15 years of follow-up. POWER ANALYSIS: We hypothesize a 50 % CRC mortality-reducing efficacy of the colonoscopy intervention and predict 50 % compliance, yielding a 25 % mortality reduction among those invited to screening. For 90 % power and a two-sided alpha level of 0.05, using a 2:1 randomization, 45 600 individuals will be randomized to control, and 22 800 individuals to the colonoscopy group. Interim analyses of the effect of colonoscopy on CRC incidence and mortality will be performed at 10-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The aim of the NordICC trial is to quantify the effectiveness of population-based colonoscopy screening. This will allow development of evidence-based guidelines for CRC screening in the general population.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1055/s-0032-1306895

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 173

Metadata

Authors
Kaminski, M., Bretthauer, M., Zauber, A., Kuipers, E., Adami, H.-O., van Ballegooijen, M., Regula, J., van Leerdam, M., Stefansson, T., Påhlman, L., Dekker, E., Hernán, M., Garborg, K., Hoff, G., & for the NordICC Study Group
Venue
Endoscopy
Published
2012-06-21
Volume
44
Issue
07
Pages
695-702
ISSN
  • 0013-726X (ISSN-L)
  • 1438-8812
OpenAlex
W2094274486
Cited by
173
References
1
FWCI
7.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: The NordICC Study: Rationale and design of a randomized trial on colonoscopy screening for colorectal cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1055/s-0032-1306895
The paper
Kaminski, M., Bretthauer, M., Zauber, A., Kuipers, E., Adami, H.-O., van Ballegooijen, M., Regula, J., van Leerdam, M., Stefansson, T., Påhlman, L., Dekker, E., Hernán, M., Garborg, K., Hoff, G., & for the NordICC Study Group. (2012). The NordICC Study: Rationale and design of a randomized trial on colonoscopy screening for colorectal cancer. Endoscopy. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1306895

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.