The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Comparison of Fecal Occult-Blood Tests for Colorectal-Cancer Screening
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Hemoccult II, a widely used guaiac test for fecal occult blood, has a low sensitivity for detecting colorectal neoplasms in asymptomatic patients at average risk. In such patients, the performance characteristics of screening tests developed to improve on Hemoccult II are not known. METHODS: A set of three fecal occult-blood tests--Hemoccult II; Hemoccult II Sensa, a more sensitive guaiac test; and HemeSelect, an immunochemical test for human hemoglobin--was mailed to all patients 50 years of age or older who were scheduled for personal health appraisals at the Kaiser Permanente Medical Center in Oakland, California. The performance of each test and of a combination test (HemeSelect to confirm positive Hemoccult II Sensa results) was evaluated by identifying screened patients who had colorectal neoplasma (carcinoma or a polyp > or = 1 cm in diameter) in the two years after screening. RESULTS: Of the 10,702 eligible patients, 8104 (75.7 percent) had at least one interpretable sample and were screened on the basis of at least one test; 96 percent of these patients had complete two-year follow-up. The sensitivity of the tests for detecting carcinoma was lowest with Hemoccult II (37.1 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 19.7 to 54.6 percent), intermediate with the combination test (65.6 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 47.6 to 83.6 percent) and with HemeSelect (68.8 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 51.1 to 86.4 percent), and highest with Hemoccult II Sensa (79.4 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 64.3 to 94.5 percent). The specificity for detecting carcinoma was 86.7 percent with Hemoccult II Sensa, 94.4 percent with HemeSelect, 97.3 percent with the combination test, and 97.7 percent with Hemoccult II. HemeSelect and the combination test detected more colorectal carcinomas and polyps than Hemoccult II, with only slight increases in the number of colonoscopies needed. CONCLUSIONS: HemeSelect and a combination test in which HemeSelect is used to confirm positive Hemoccult II Sensa results improve on Hemoccult II in screening patients for colorectal carcinoma.
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
Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions, 2nd ed
GROVE, W. A. (1981) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/ajp.138.12.1644-a · Cited by 3,748
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
Screening for Colorectal Cancer With Fecal Occult Blood Testing and Sigmoidoscopy
Winawer, S. J., Flehinger, B. J., Schottenfeld, D., & Miller, D. G. (1993) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/85.16.1311 · Cited by 381
Prevention of colorectal cancer by once-only sigmoidoscopy
Atkin, W. S., Northover, J. M. A., Cuzick, J., & Whynes, D. K. (1993) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/0140-6736(93)90499-7 · Cited by 342
Basic Issues in Population Screening for Cancer 23
(1980) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/64.5.1263 · Cited by 321
Macrae, F. A., & St. John, D. J. B. (1982) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1016/s0016-5085(82)80252-7 · Cited by 299
Ahlquist, D. A. (1993) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.269.10.1262 · Cited by 286
Effect of Fecal Occult Blood Testing on Mortality from Colorectal Cancer: A Case–Control Study
Selby, J. V., Friedman, G. D., Quesenberry, Jr., & Weiss, N. S. (1993) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-118-1-199301010-00001 · Cited by 230
Hemoccult Screening in Detecting Colorectal Neoplasm: Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predictive Value
Allison, J. E., Feldman, R., & Tekawa, I. S. (1990) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-112-5-328 · Cited by 129
Self-citation
Cited by
WINAWER, S. (2003) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/gast.2003.50044 · Cited by 2,143
Wolf, A. M. D., Fontham, E. T. H., Church, T. R., Flowers, C. R., Guerra, C. E., LaMonte, S. J., Etzioni, R., McKenna, M. T., Oeffinger, K. C., Shih, Y. T., et al. (2018) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.21457 · Cited by 1,944
Potential of fecal microbiota for early-stage detection of colorectal cancer
Zeller, G., Tap, J., Voigt, A. Y., Sunagawa, S., Kultima, J. R., Costea, P. I., Amiot, A., Böhm, J., Brunetti, F., Habermann, N., et al. (2014) · Molecular Systems Biology · doi:10.15252/msb.20145645 · Cited by 1,375
Lin, J. S., Bowles, E. J. A., Williams, S. B., & Morrison, C. C. (2017) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2017.0562 · Cited by 1,082
ACG Clinical Guidelines: Colorectal Cancer Screening 2021
Shaukat, A., Kahi, C. J., Burke, C. A., Rabeneck, L., Sauer, B. G., & Rex, D. K. (2021) · American Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.14309/ajg.0000000000001122 · Cited by 853
Metadata
- Authors
- Allison, J. E., Tekawa, I. S., Ransom, L. J., & Adrain, A. L.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 1996-01-18
- Volume
- 334
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 155-160
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W2339085893
- Cited by
- 622
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 9.94
- 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 Comparison of Fecal Occult-Blood Tests for Colorectal-Cancer Screening. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199601183340304
- The paper
- Allison, J. E., Tekawa, I. S., Ransom, L. J., & Adrain, A. L. (1996). A Comparison of Fecal Occult-Blood Tests for Colorectal-Cancer Screening. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199601183340304
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.