Evaluating the implementation of a multicomponent intervention to improve faecal immunochemical test-based (FIT) colorectal cancer screening in primary care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Screening has proven effective at reducing the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC). The faecal immunochemical test (FIT) is recommended for screening people aged 50-74 years at average risk of CRC in Alberta, Canada. This project implemented a multicomponent intervention in real-world, primary care settings in Alberta to improve the FIT participation rate and evaluated the reach, effectiveness and implementation outcomes.The multicomponent intervention comprised of in-clinic FIT kit distribution, patient education and reminder calls, was implemented in four primary care clinics. Reach was measured as the proportion of patients receiving the intervention. Effectiveness was measured by comparing the proportion of patients completing FIT during preintervention and perintervention periods. Implementation was measured by the perceived acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility of providers in implementing the intervention. Data were collected from electronic medical records and validated survey tools.Four clinics implemented the intervention during an 8-month study period (September 2021 to April 2022); 99% of eligible patients received a FIT kit. The baseline FIT completion rate across participating clinics was 62%, which increased by 13 percentage points to 75% during the intervention period. Of the 75% who completed the FIT, 56% did without a reminder call, whereas 19% did so after receiving one or more reminders. More than 90% of providers perceived the intervention implementation as acceptable, feasible and appropriate.The multicomponent FIT intervention was perceived as acceptable, feasible, and appropriate and improved the FIT screening rates in pilot clinics. An implementation guidance document has been developed and tested to communicate the implementation process for use by other primary care clinics and aid in the spread of the intervention across Alberta. Implementing this intervention in routine practice can help decrease the incidence and mortality of CRC.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".