A comparison of different strategies used to invite subjects with a positive faecal occult blood test to a colonoscopy assessment. A randomised controlled trial in population-based screening programmes
Abstract Objective The purpose of this parallel randomised controlled trial was to compare compliance with different modalities used to invite patients with a positive immunochemical faecal occult blood test (FIT +) for a total colonoscopy (TC). Method FIT + patients from nine Italian colorectal can...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Preventive medicine 2014-08, Vol.65, p.70-76 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 76 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | |
| container_start_page | 70 |
| container_title | Preventive medicine |
| container_volume | 65 |
| creator | Zorzi, Manuel Giorgi Rossi, Paolo Cogo, Carla Falcini, Fabio Giorgi, Daniela Grazzini, Grazia Mariotti, Loretta Matarese, Vincenzo Soppelsa, Fabio Senore, Carlo Ferro, Antonio |
| description | Abstract Objective The purpose of this parallel randomised controlled trial was to compare compliance with different modalities used to invite patients with a positive immunochemical faecal occult blood test (FIT +) for a total colonoscopy (TC). Method FIT + patients from nine Italian colorectal cancer screening programmes were randomised to be invited for a TC initially by mail or by phone and, for non-compliers, to be recalled by mail, for counselling with a general practitioner, or to meet with a specialist screening practitioner (nurse or healthcare assistant). Results In all, 3777 patients were randomised to different invitation strategies. Compliance with an initial invitation by mail and by phone was similar (86.0% vs. 84.0%, relative risk — RR: 1.02; 95%CI 0.97–1.08). Among non-responders to the initial invitation, compliance with a recall by appointment with a specialist practitioner was 50.4%, significantly higher than with a mail recall (38.1%; RR:1.33; 95%CI 1.01–1.76) or with a face-to-face counselling with the GP (30.8%; RR:1.45;95%CI 1.14–1.87). Conclusion Compliance with an initial invitation for a TC by mail and by phone was similar. A personal meeting with a specialist screening practitioner was associated with the highest compliance among non-compliers with initial invitations, while the involvement of GPs in this particular activity seemed less effective. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.04.022 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1562667855</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0091743514001534</els_id><sourcerecordid>1545420751</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c510t-1593c84b09961b90fd2f2bbbf39c401472ad463a6c7aa62ff6a1d0dea6818b953</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkt-K1DAUxoso7rr6BILkRvCmY5KmaXuhMCz-gwUv1OuQpidjxjapOeks84i-lakzi-CNC4Fc5Ped7-ScryieM7phlMnX-81xnmDYcMrEhubD-YPiktFOlpRL-rC4pLRjZSOq-qJ4grinlDFJxePigouWsabuLotfW2LCNOvoMHgSLBmctRDBJ4Ip6gQ7B0gWhIGkQJw_uAQEl34PJiG5dek70WQO6JI7ALEajB5JMGYZE-nHELIMMK1anY3G4AOaMB-JRgTEKftsyJZE7YcwudXFBJ9iGMfVMLpczPlcf15GnVzwZa9XCE0E8M7vyBzDLuppAnxaPLJ6RHh2vq-Kb-_ffb3-WN58_vDpentTmprRVLK6q0wretp1kvUdtQO3vO97W3VG5Ek2XA9CVlqaRmvJrZWaDXQALVvW9l1dXRWvTnWz9c8lf07lxg2Mo_YQFlSsllzKpq3vg9Zt1zVt1d4DFbXgtKlZRqsTamJAjGDVHN2k41ExqtZkqL36kwy1JkPRfDjPqhdng6Vf3-40d1HIwMszoDEv0eadGId_uVa2OT8ic29OHOQhHxxEhcaBNzC4mEOhhuD-08jbf_RmdN5lyx9wBNyHJfq8P8UUckXVlzXEa4aZyPmtK1H9BuXC8V8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1545420751</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A comparison of different strategies used to invite subjects with a positive faecal occult blood test to a colonoscopy assessment. A randomised controlled trial in population-based screening programmes</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Zorzi, Manuel ; Giorgi Rossi, Paolo ; Cogo, Carla ; Falcini, Fabio ; Giorgi, Daniela ; Grazzini, Grazia ; Mariotti, Loretta ; Matarese, Vincenzo ; Soppelsa, Fabio ; Senore, Carlo ; Ferro, Antonio</creator><creatorcontrib>Zorzi, Manuel ; Giorgi Rossi, Paolo ; Cogo, Carla ; Falcini, Fabio ; Giorgi, Daniela ; Grazzini, Grazia ; Mariotti, Loretta ; Matarese, Vincenzo ; Soppelsa, Fabio ; Senore, Carlo ; Ferro, Antonio ; the PARC Working Group ; PARC Working Group</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Objective The purpose of this parallel randomised controlled trial was to compare compliance with different modalities used to invite patients with a positive immunochemical faecal occult blood test (FIT +) for a total colonoscopy (TC). Method FIT + patients from nine Italian colorectal cancer screening programmes were randomised to be invited for a TC initially by mail or by phone and, for non-compliers, to be recalled by mail, for counselling with a general practitioner, or to meet with a specialist screening practitioner (nurse or healthcare assistant). Results In all, 3777 patients were randomised to different invitation strategies. Compliance with an initial invitation by mail and by phone was similar (86.0% vs. 84.0%, relative risk — RR: 1.02; 95%CI 0.97–1.08). Among non-responders to the initial invitation, compliance with a recall by appointment with a specialist practitioner was 50.4%, significantly higher than with a mail recall (38.1%; RR:1.33; 95%CI 1.01–1.76) or with a face-to-face counselling with the GP (30.8%; RR:1.45;95%CI 1.14–1.87). Conclusion Compliance with an initial invitation for a TC by mail and by phone was similar. A personal meeting with a specialist screening practitioner was associated with the highest compliance among non-compliers with initial invitations, while the involvement of GPs in this particular activity seemed less effective.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0091-7435</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1096-0260</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.04.022</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24811759</identifier><identifier>CODEN: PVTMA3</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Aged ; Biological and medical sciences ; Blood tests ; Colonoscopy ; Colonoscopy - psychology ; Colonoscopy - standards ; Colonoscopy - statistics & numerical data ; Colorectal cancer screening ; Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis ; Colorectal Neoplasms - prevention & control ; Compliance ; Compliance with colonoscopy ; Counseling ; Digestive system. Abdomen ; Early Detection of Cancer - methods ; Early Detection of Cancer - psychology ; Early Detection of Cancer - statistics & numerical data ; Endoscopy ; Faecal occult blood test ; Female ; Humans ; Internal Medicine ; Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) ; Italy ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Miscellaneous ; Occult ; Occult Blood ; Office Visits ; Patient Compliance - psychology ; Patient Compliance - statistics & numerical data ; Postal Service ; Prevention and actions ; Public health. Hygiene ; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine ; Screening ; Specialists ; Specialization ; Telephone</subject><ispartof>Preventive medicine, 2014-08, Vol.65, p.70-76</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>2014 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c510t-1593c84b09961b90fd2f2bbbf39c401472ad463a6c7aa62ff6a1d0dea6818b953</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c510t-1593c84b09961b90fd2f2bbbf39c401472ad463a6c7aa62ff6a1d0dea6818b953</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0091743514001534$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,30977,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=28680114$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24811759$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zorzi, Manuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Giorgi Rossi, Paolo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cogo, Carla</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Falcini, Fabio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Giorgi, Daniela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grazzini, Grazia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mariotti, Loretta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matarese, Vincenzo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soppelsa, Fabio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Senore, Carlo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ferro, Antonio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>the PARC Working Group</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PARC Working Group</creatorcontrib><title>A comparison of different strategies used to invite subjects with a positive faecal occult blood test to a colonoscopy assessment. A randomised controlled trial in population-based screening programmes</title><title>Preventive medicine</title><addtitle>Prev Med</addtitle><description>Abstract Objective The purpose of this parallel randomised controlled trial was to compare compliance with different modalities used to invite patients with a positive immunochemical faecal occult blood test (FIT +) for a total colonoscopy (TC). Method FIT + patients from nine Italian colorectal cancer screening programmes were randomised to be invited for a TC initially by mail or by phone and, for non-compliers, to be recalled by mail, for counselling with a general practitioner, or to meet with a specialist screening practitioner (nurse or healthcare assistant). Results In all, 3777 patients were randomised to different invitation strategies. Compliance with an initial invitation by mail and by phone was similar (86.0% vs. 84.0%, relative risk — RR: 1.02; 95%CI 0.97–1.08). Among non-responders to the initial invitation, compliance with a recall by appointment with a specialist practitioner was 50.4%, significantly higher than with a mail recall (38.1%; RR:1.33; 95%CI 1.01–1.76) or with a face-to-face counselling with the GP (30.8%; RR:1.45;95%CI 1.14–1.87). Conclusion Compliance with an initial invitation for a TC by mail and by phone was similar. A personal meeting with a specialist screening practitioner was associated with the highest compliance among non-compliers with initial invitations, while the involvement of GPs in this particular activity seemed less effective.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Blood tests</subject><subject>Colonoscopy</subject><subject>Colonoscopy - psychology</subject><subject>Colonoscopy - standards</subject><subject>Colonoscopy - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Colorectal cancer screening</subject><subject>Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis</subject><subject>Colorectal Neoplasms - prevention & control</subject><subject>Compliance</subject><subject>Compliance with colonoscopy</subject><subject>Counseling</subject><subject>Digestive system. Abdomen</subject><subject>Early Detection of Cancer - methods</subject><subject>Early Detection of Cancer - psychology</subject><subject>Early Detection of Cancer - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Endoscopy</subject><subject>Faecal occult blood test</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Internal Medicine</subject><subject>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</subject><subject>Italy</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Miscellaneous</subject><subject>Occult</subject><subject>Occult Blood</subject><subject>Office Visits</subject><subject>Patient Compliance - psychology</subject><subject>Patient Compliance - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Postal Service</subject><subject>Prevention and actions</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</subject><subject>Screening</subject><subject>Specialists</subject><subject>Specialization</subject><subject>Telephone</subject><issn>0091-7435</issn><issn>1096-0260</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkt-K1DAUxoso7rr6BILkRvCmY5KmaXuhMCz-gwUv1OuQpidjxjapOeks84i-lakzi-CNC4Fc5Ped7-ScryieM7phlMnX-81xnmDYcMrEhubD-YPiktFOlpRL-rC4pLRjZSOq-qJ4grinlDFJxePigouWsabuLotfW2LCNOvoMHgSLBmctRDBJ4Ip6gQ7B0gWhIGkQJw_uAQEl34PJiG5dek70WQO6JI7ALEajB5JMGYZE-nHELIMMK1anY3G4AOaMB-JRgTEKftsyJZE7YcwudXFBJ9iGMfVMLpczPlcf15GnVzwZa9XCE0E8M7vyBzDLuppAnxaPLJ6RHh2vq-Kb-_ffb3-WN58_vDpentTmprRVLK6q0wretp1kvUdtQO3vO97W3VG5Ek2XA9CVlqaRmvJrZWaDXQALVvW9l1dXRWvTnWz9c8lf07lxg2Mo_YQFlSsllzKpq3vg9Zt1zVt1d4DFbXgtKlZRqsTamJAjGDVHN2k41ExqtZkqL36kwy1JkPRfDjPqhdng6Vf3-40d1HIwMszoDEv0eadGId_uVa2OT8ic29OHOQhHxxEhcaBNzC4mEOhhuD-08jbf_RmdN5lyx9wBNyHJfq8P8UUckXVlzXEa4aZyPmtK1H9BuXC8V8</recordid><startdate>20140801</startdate><enddate>20140801</enddate><creator>Zorzi, Manuel</creator><creator>Giorgi Rossi, Paolo</creator><creator>Cogo, Carla</creator><creator>Falcini, Fabio</creator><creator>Giorgi, Daniela</creator><creator>Grazzini, Grazia</creator><creator>Mariotti, Loretta</creator><creator>Matarese, Vincenzo</creator><creator>Soppelsa, Fabio</creator><creator>Senore, Carlo</creator><creator>Ferro, Antonio</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7U1</scope><scope>7U2</scope><scope>C1K</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140801</creationdate><title>A comparison of different strategies used to invite subjects with a positive faecal occult blood test to a colonoscopy assessment. A randomised controlled trial in population-based screening programmes</title><author>Zorzi, Manuel ; Giorgi Rossi, Paolo ; Cogo, Carla ; Falcini, Fabio ; Giorgi, Daniela ; Grazzini, Grazia ; Mariotti, Loretta ; Matarese, Vincenzo ; Soppelsa, Fabio ; Senore, Carlo ; Ferro, Antonio</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c510t-1593c84b09961b90fd2f2bbbf39c401472ad463a6c7aa62ff6a1d0dea6818b953</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Blood tests</topic><topic>Colonoscopy</topic><topic>Colonoscopy - psychology</topic><topic>Colonoscopy - standards</topic><topic>Colonoscopy - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Colorectal cancer screening</topic><topic>Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis</topic><topic>Colorectal Neoplasms - prevention & control</topic><topic>Compliance</topic><topic>Compliance with colonoscopy</topic><topic>Counseling</topic><topic>Digestive system. Abdomen</topic><topic>Early Detection of Cancer - methods</topic><topic>Early Detection of Cancer - psychology</topic><topic>Early Detection of Cancer - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Endoscopy</topic><topic>Faecal occult blood test</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Internal Medicine</topic><topic>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</topic><topic>Italy</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Miscellaneous</topic><topic>Occult</topic><topic>Occult Blood</topic><topic>Office Visits</topic><topic>Patient Compliance - psychology</topic><topic>Patient Compliance - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Postal Service</topic><topic>Prevention and actions</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</topic><topic>Screening</topic><topic>Specialists</topic><topic>Specialization</topic><topic>Telephone</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zorzi, Manuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Giorgi Rossi, Paolo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cogo, Carla</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Falcini, Fabio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Giorgi, Daniela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grazzini, Grazia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mariotti, Loretta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matarese, Vincenzo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soppelsa, Fabio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Senore, Carlo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ferro, Antonio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>the PARC Working Group</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PARC Working Group</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>Risk Abstracts</collection><collection>Safety Science and Risk</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>Preventive medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zorzi, Manuel</au><au>Giorgi Rossi, Paolo</au><au>Cogo, Carla</au><au>Falcini, Fabio</au><au>Giorgi, Daniela</au><au>Grazzini, Grazia</au><au>Mariotti, Loretta</au><au>Matarese, Vincenzo</au><au>Soppelsa, Fabio</au><au>Senore, Carlo</au><au>Ferro, Antonio</au><aucorp>the PARC Working Group</aucorp><aucorp>PARC Working Group</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A comparison of different strategies used to invite subjects with a positive faecal occult blood test to a colonoscopy assessment. A randomised controlled trial in population-based screening programmes</atitle><jtitle>Preventive medicine</jtitle><addtitle>Prev Med</addtitle><date>2014-08-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>65</volume><spage>70</spage><epage>76</epage><pages>70-76</pages><issn>0091-7435</issn><eissn>1096-0260</eissn><coden>PVTMA3</coden><abstract>Abstract Objective The purpose of this parallel randomised controlled trial was to compare compliance with different modalities used to invite patients with a positive immunochemical faecal occult blood test (FIT +) for a total colonoscopy (TC). Method FIT + patients from nine Italian colorectal cancer screening programmes were randomised to be invited for a TC initially by mail or by phone and, for non-compliers, to be recalled by mail, for counselling with a general practitioner, or to meet with a specialist screening practitioner (nurse or healthcare assistant). Results In all, 3777 patients were randomised to different invitation strategies. Compliance with an initial invitation by mail and by phone was similar (86.0% vs. 84.0%, relative risk — RR: 1.02; 95%CI 0.97–1.08). Among non-responders to the initial invitation, compliance with a recall by appointment with a specialist practitioner was 50.4%, significantly higher than with a mail recall (38.1%; RR:1.33; 95%CI 1.01–1.76) or with a face-to-face counselling with the GP (30.8%; RR:1.45;95%CI 1.14–1.87). Conclusion Compliance with an initial invitation for a TC by mail and by phone was similar. A personal meeting with a specialist screening practitioner was associated with the highest compliance among non-compliers with initial invitations, while the involvement of GPs in this particular activity seemed less effective.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>24811759</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.04.022</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0091-7435 |
| ispartof | Preventive medicine, 2014-08, Vol.65, p.70-76 |
| issn | 0091-7435 1096-0260 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1562667855 |
| source | Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
| subjects | Aged Biological and medical sciences Blood tests Colonoscopy Colonoscopy - psychology Colonoscopy - standards Colonoscopy - statistics & numerical data Colorectal cancer screening Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis Colorectal Neoplasms - prevention & control Compliance Compliance with colonoscopy Counseling Digestive system. Abdomen Early Detection of Cancer - methods Early Detection of Cancer - psychology Early Detection of Cancer - statistics & numerical data Endoscopy Faecal occult blood test Female Humans Internal Medicine Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) Italy Male Medical sciences Middle Aged Miscellaneous Occult Occult Blood Office Visits Patient Compliance - psychology Patient Compliance - statistics & numerical data Postal Service Prevention and actions Public health. Hygiene Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine Screening Specialists Specialization Telephone |
| title | A comparison of different strategies used to invite subjects with a positive faecal occult blood test to a colonoscopy assessment. A randomised controlled trial in population-based screening programmes |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T03%3A05%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20comparison%20of%20different%20strategies%20used%20to%20invite%20subjects%20with%20a%20positive%20faecal%20occult%20blood%20test%20to%20a%20colonoscopy%20assessment.%20A%20randomised%20controlled%20trial%20in%20population-based%20screening%20programmes&rft.jtitle=Preventive%20medicine&rft.au=Zorzi,%20Manuel&rft.aucorp=the%20PARC%20Working%20Group&rft.date=2014-08-01&rft.volume=65&rft.spage=70&rft.epage=76&rft.pages=70-76&rft.issn=0091-7435&rft.eissn=1096-0260&rft.coden=PVTMA3&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.04.022&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1545420751%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1545420751&rft_id=info:pmid/24811759&rft_els_id=S0091743514001534&rfr_iscdi=true |