{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,29]],"date-time":"2025-10-29T19:39:20Z","timestamp":1761766760917,"version":"build-2065373602"},"reference-count":36,"publisher":"BMJ","issue":"7","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2020,7,23]],"date-time":"2020-07-23T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1595462400000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":22,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["bmj.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["BMJ Open"],"accepted":{"date-parts":[[2020,5,29]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2020,7]]},"abstract":"<jats:sec>\n                  <jats:title>Objectives<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>In England, a significant proportion of people who take part in the national bowel cancer screening programme (BCSP) and have a positive faecal occult blood test (FOBt) result, do not attend follow-up colonoscopy (CC). The aim of this study was to investigate differences in intended participation in a follow-up investigation by diagnostic modality offered including CC, CT colonography (CTC) or capsule endoscopy (CE).<\/jats:p>\n               <\/jats:sec>\n               <jats:sec>\n                  <jats:title>Setting<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>We performed a randomised online experiment with individuals who had previously completed an FOBt as part of the English BCSP.<\/jats:p>\n               <\/jats:sec>\n               <jats:sec>\n                  <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>Participants (n=953) were randomly allocated to receive one of three online vignettes asking participants to imagine they had received an abnormal FOBt result, and that they had been invited for a follow-up test. The follow-up test offered was either: CC (n=346), CTC (n=302) or CE (n=305). Participants were then asked how likely they were to have their allocated test or if they refused, either of the other tests. Respondents were also asked to cite possible emotional and practical barriers to follow up testing. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to investigate intentions.<\/jats:p>\n               <\/jats:sec>\n               <jats:sec>\n                  <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>Intention to have the test was higher in the CTC group (96.7%) compared with the CC group (91.8%; OR 2.64; 95% CI 1.22 to 5.73). CTC was considered less \u2018off-putting\u2019 (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.94) and less uncomfortable compared with CC (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.77). For those who did not intend to have the test they were offered, CE (39.7%) or no investigation (34.5%) was preferable to CC (8.6%) or CTC (17.2%).<\/jats:p>\n               <\/jats:sec>\n               <jats:sec>\n                  <jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>Alternative tests have the potential to increase attendance at diagnostic follow-up appointments.<\/jats:p>\n               <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1136\/bmjopen-2019-035264","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2020,7,27]],"date-time":"2020-07-27T01:59:44Z","timestamp":1595815184000},"page":"e035264","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/crossmarkpolicy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":4,"title":["Preferences for different diagnostic modalities to follow up abnormal colorectal cancer screening results: a hypothetical vignette study"],"prefix":"10.1136","volume":"10","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-3815-0624","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Aradhna","family":"Kaushal","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Sandro Tiziano","family":"Stoffel","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK"},{"name":"European Center of Pharmaceutical Medicine, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-8900-749X","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Robert","family":"Kerrison","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-7971-0691","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Christian","family":"von Wagner","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"239","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2020,7,26]]},"reference":[{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.1","unstructured":"Cancer Research UK . Bowel cancer statistics. Available: https:\/\/www.cancerresearchuk.org\/health-professional\/cancer-statistics\/statistics-by-cancer-type\/bowel-cancer [Accessed July 2019]."},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/gutjnl-2011-300843"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"267","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejca.2018.07.135","article-title":"Uptake of the English bowel (colorectal) cancer screening programme: an update 5 years after the full roll-out","volume":"103","author":"Hirst","year":"2018","journal-title":"Eur J Cancer"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1038\/bjc.2015.469"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1532","DOI":"10.1002\/ijc.32497","article-title":"Association between time to colonoscopy after a positive guaiac fecal test result and risk of colorectal cancer and advanced stage disease at diagnosis","volume":"146","author":"Beshara","year":"2020","journal-title":"Int J Cancer"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"659","DOI":"10.2147\/CLEP.S206873","article-title":"Time to colonoscopy, cancer probability, and precursor lesions in the Danish colorectal cancer screening program","volume":"11","author":"Kaalby","year":"2019","journal-title":"Clin Epidemiol"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.7","unstructured":"Paynter S . A pilot study exploring primary care involvement in re-engaging patients with the bowel cancer screening programme who have tested positive on screening but failed to complete colonoscopy. Public Health England, 2015."},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"12","DOI":"10.1177\/0969141316645629","article-title":"Patient factors associated with non-attendance at colonoscopy after a positive screening faecal occult blood test","volume":"24","author":"Plumb","year":"2017","journal-title":"J Med Screen"},{"journal-title":"Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev","article-title":"Systematic review and meta-study synthesis of qualitative studies evaluating facilitators and barriers to participation in colorectal cancer screening","author":"Honein-AbouHaidar","key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.9"},{"journal-title":"Future Oncol","article-title":"Uptake of colorectal cancer screening: system, provider and individual factors and strategies to improve participation","author":"Power","key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.10"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.11","first-page":"e46","volume-title":"Incomplete diagnostic follow-up after a positive colorectal cancer screening test: a systematic review","volume":"40","author":"AJJoPH","year":"2017"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.7326\/M17-1361"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1001\/archinternmed.2010.372"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-230X-12-80"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.15","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"691","DOI":"10.1097\/MCG.0b013e31824432df","article-title":"A survey of potential adherence to capsule colonoscopy in patients who have accepted or declined conventional colonoscopy","volume":"46","author":"Rex","year":"2012","journal-title":"J Clin Gastroenterol"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2214\/AJR.11.7671"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa070543"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1038\/35013140"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s10648-006-9027-y"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1037\/0033-2909.134.2.270"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/014616727800400317"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.22","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"376","DOI":"10.1007\/s11606-011-1870-y","article-title":"Bringing an organizational perspective to the optimal number of colorectal cancer screening options debate","volume":"27","author":"Partin","year":"2012","journal-title":"J Gen Intern Med"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.23","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1186\/s12889-019-6997-5","article-title":"Testing verbal quantifiers for social norms messages in cancer screening: evidence from an online experiment","volume":"19","author":"Stoffel","year":"2019","journal-title":"BMC Public Health"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.24","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"98","DOI":"10.1177\/0969141318806322","article-title":"Testing active choice for screening practitioner's gender in endoscopy among disinclined women: an online experiment","volume":"26","author":"Stoffel","year":"2019","journal-title":"J Med Screen"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.25","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1168","DOI":"10.1002\/pon.4195","article-title":"Inequalities in cancer screening participation: examining differences in perceived benefits and barriers","volume":"25","author":"Smith","year":"2016","journal-title":"Psychooncology"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0272989X0102100105"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.27","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1186\/s12885-015-1167-3","article-title":"The impact of supplementary narrative-based information on colorectal cancer screening beliefs and intention","volume":"15","author":"McGregor","year":"2015","journal-title":"BMC Cancer"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.28","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1186\/s12889-018-6071-8","article-title":"Barriers to bowel scope (flexible sigmoidoscopy) screening: a comparison of non-responders, active decliners and non-attenders","volume":"18","author":"von Wagner","year":"2018","journal-title":"BMC Public Health"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.socscimed.2003.10.030"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.30","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Cohen J . Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge, 2013.","DOI":"10.4324\/9780203771587"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.31","unstructured":"StataCorp . Stata statistical software: release 16. College Station, TX: StataCorp LLC, 2019."},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.32","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"761","DOI":"10.1055\/s-0044-100721","article-title":"Colon capsule versus computed tomography colonography for colorectal cancer screening in patients with positive fecal occult blood test who refuse colonoscopy: a randomized trial","volume":"50","author":"Pioche","year":"2018","journal-title":"Endoscopy"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.33","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.dld.2012.11.008"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.34","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-2458-8-34"},{"journal-title":"Prev Med","article-title":"Patient and provider barriers to colorectal cancer screening in the primary care safety-net","author":"O'Malley","key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.35"},{"key":"2025101811472391000_10.7.e035264.36","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa1311194"}],"container-title":["BMJ Open"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/syndication.highwire.org\/content\/doi\/10.1136\/bmjopen-2019-035264","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,18]],"date-time":"2025-10-18T18:47:31Z","timestamp":1760813251000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/bmjopen.bmj.com\/lookup\/doi\/10.1136\/bmjopen-2019-035264"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2020,7]]},"references-count":36,"journal-issue":{"issue":"7","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2020,7,26]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2020,7]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1136\/bmjopen-2019-035264"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmjopen-2019-035264","relation":{},"ISSN":["2044-6055","2044-6055"],"issn-type":[{"type":"print","value":"2044-6055"},{"type":"electronic","value":"2044-6055"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2020,7]]}}}