Changes in health behavior 1 year after testing negative at a colorectal cancer screening: a randomized-controlled study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When planning national screening programs, it is important to investigate potential changes in health behavior initiated by the screening. Knowledge of the consequences of different colorectal cancer (CRC) screening modalities for health behavior is limited. We aimed to investigate differences in 1-year health behavior changes after testing negative in CRC screening by one of two screening modalities. Participants of both sexes aged 50-74 years assigned randomly to five biennial rounds of fecal immunochemical test (FIT), one round of flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS), or no screening (control) were invited to complete a self-reported lifestyle questionnaire on smoking, body weight, physical activity, alcohol intake, and consumption of selected dietary items at baseline and at 1-year follow-up. In total, 1809 and 1327 individuals in the FIT and the FS arm, respectively, completed the lifestyle questionnaire, as did 1029 controls. We analyzed differences in 1-year health behavior changes between the arms at follow-up by analysis of covariance and logistic regression. Overall, 1-year changes in health behavior were moderate and probably of no clinical relevance. Participants with negative CRC screening test results in the first round of the FIT arm reduced their alcohol consumption significantly more than controls [-0.29 glass/week (95% confidence interval -0.54 to -0.04)]. Body weight decreased more in participants with negative screening test results in the FS than in the FIT arm [-0.31 kg (95% confidence interval -0.55 to -0.08)]. The present study did not suggest unfavorable short-term consequences in the health behavior of individuals who received a negative CRC screening test result from either a first round of FIT or a once-only FS screening.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".