Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,702

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A Case–Control Study of Screening Sigmoidoscopy and Mortality from Colorectal Cancer

Open access
Selby, Joe V., Friedman, Gary D., Quesenberry, Charles P., Weiss, Noel S.·1992·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of sigmoidoscopic screening in reducing mortality from colorectal cancer remains uncertain. A randomized trial would be ideal for clarifying this issue but is very difficult to conduct. Case-control studies provide an alternative method of estimating the efficacy of screening sigmoidoscopy. METHODS: Using data on the 261 members of the Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program who died of cancer of the rectum or distal colon from 1971 to 1988, we examined the use of screening by rigid sigmoidoscopy during the 10 years before the diagnosis and compared it with the use of screening in 868 control subjects matched with the case subjects for age and sex. RESULTS: Only 8.8 percent of the case subjects had undergone screening by sigmoidoscopy, as compared with 24.2 percent of the controls (matched odds ratio, 0.30; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.19 to 0.48). Adjustment for potential confounding factors increased the odds ratio to 0.41 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.25 to 0.69). The negative association was as strong when the most recent sigmoidoscopy was 9 to 10 years before diagnosis as it was when examinations were more recent. By contrast, for 268 subjects with fatal colon cancer above the reach of the sigmoidoscope and for 268 controls, the adjusted odds ratio was 0.96 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.61 to 1.50). The specificity of the negative association for cancer within the reach of the sigmoidoscope is consistent with a true efficacy of screening rather than a confounding by unmeasured selection factors. CONCLUSIONS: Screening by sigmoidoscopy can reduce mortality from cancer of the rectum and distal colon. A screening once every 10 years may be nearly as efficacious as more frequent screening.

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 · 10.1056/nejm199203053261001

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.

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

Cited by

See all 1,702

Metadata

Authors
Selby, J. V., Friedman, G. D., Quesenberry, C. P., & Weiss, N. S.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1992-03-05
Volume
326
Issue
10
Pages
653-657
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2014495259
Cited by
1,702
References
0
FWCI
21.54
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: A Case–Control Study of Screening Sigmoidoscopy and Mortality from Colorectal Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199203053261001
The paper
Selby, J. V., Friedman, G. D., Quesenberry, C. P., & Weiss, N. S. (1992). A Case–Control Study of Screening Sigmoidoscopy and Mortality from Colorectal Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199203053261001

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.