Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Screening for colorectal cancer.

G S Gazelle1, P M McMahon, F J Scholz

  • 1Department of Radiology, Decision Analysis and Technology Assessment Group, Zero Emerson Pl, Suite 2H, Boston, MA 02114, USA. gazelle@nmr@mgh.harvard.edu

Radiology
|May 5, 2000
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Perigastric appendagitis: CT and clinical features in eight patients.

Clinical radiology·2014
Same author

Defendant characteristics and judgment behaviors of adolescent mock jurors.

Journal of youth and adolescence·2013
Same author

The prevalence of Barrett's esophagus in the US: estimates from a simulation model confirmed by SEER data.

Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus·2010
Same author

Risk of bias in meta-analysis on erythropoietin-stimulating agents in heart failure.

Heart (British Cardiac Society)·2009
Same author

Comparing and predicting the costs and outcomes of patients with major and minor stroke using the Boston Acute Stroke Imaging Scale neuroimaging classification system.

AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology·2009
Same author

Two models better than one.

Gut·2005

Colorectal cancer screening is underutilized despite proven effectiveness in reducing incidence and mortality. This review covers risk factors, screening options, and cost-effectiveness to promote wider adoption.

Area of Science:

  • Oncology
  • Preventive Medicine
  • Public Health

Background:

  • Colorectal cancer is a leading cause of cancer death in the US.
  • Screening and polyp removal have decreased incidence and mortality over 20 years.
  • Colorectal cancer screening remains underutilized.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To review the current status and future outlook of colorectal cancer screening.
  • To discuss risk factors, disease development, and screening rationale.
  • To summarize cost-effectiveness and emerging consensus on screening approaches.

Main Methods:

  • Literature review of published studies on colorectal cancer screening.
  • Analysis of risk factors, anatomic distribution, and polyp development.
  • Summary of cost-effectiveness data and expert consensus.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Colorectal cancer incidence and mortality have declined due to screening and polyp removal.
  • Despite benefits, screening rates remain suboptimal.
  • Various screening options exist, with ongoing research into optimal approaches.

Conclusions:

  • Increased utilization of colorectal cancer screening is crucial for further reducing disease burden.
  • Emerging consensus supports the importance of screening and standardized approaches.
  • Future efforts should focus on improving screening accessibility and adherence.