Barriers and Facilitators to Colorectal Cancer Screening in South Asian Immigrants: A Systematic Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review is to broaden our knowledge of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in South Asian immigrants living in Canada, Hong Kong, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Australia by determining the barriers and facilitators and examining interventions for CRC screening. METHODS: A literature search of PubMed, Ovid Medline, and Google was conducted using South Asian, Asian Indians, cancer screening, colorectal neoplasm, early detection of cancer, and mass screening as search terms. The review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Only research articles written in English from 2000 to July 2022 were collected. Inclusion criteria included all English-language articles, the South Asian population, and either reporting barriers, facilitators, interventions, or recommendations for CRC screening. Exclusion criteria included all articles that did not meet inclusion criteria or were duplicates. A total of 32 articles were deemed eligible for inclusion and were retrieved for further analysis. The countries of origin in the articles reviewed included Canada, Hong Kong, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Australia. RESULTS: In general, the studies indicated that South Asians have low CRC screening rates. The most common barriers reported were poor knowledge/awareness of CRC and CRC screening, lack of physician recommendation, psychological factors (e.g., fear, anxiety, and shame), cultural/religious factors, and sociodemographic factors (language barrier, lower income, and female gender). The most important facilitator reported was the physician's recommendation. Six intervention studies of either education or organized screening programs were shown to have a positive influence by increasing knowledge and improving attitudes toward CRC screening. CONCLUSION: Of the limited number of studies identified, the population categorized as South Asians was largely heterogeneous, including a diversity of ethnicities. Although the rates of CRC among South Asians were relatively low, there remain many cultural barriers to the awareness of and screening for CRC in this population. Further research in this population is needed to better identify the factors related to CRC in individuals of South Asian ethnicity. Recommending CRC screening by physicians and mid-level providers and educating patients with culturally sensitive programs and materials are important to increase knowledge and awareness of CRC and CRC 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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it