4.6 Review

The risk of bleeding and perforation from sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: A systematic review and meta-analyses

Related references

Note: Only part of the references are listed.
Review Health Care Sciences & Services

Methodological Quality of PROMs in Psychosocial Consequences of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review

Emma Grundtvig Gram et al.

Summary: This systematic review aimed to assess the adequacy of measurement properties in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) used to quantify psychosocial consequences of colorectal cancer screening among adults at average risk. The majority of included PROMs had inadequate development and measurement properties, raising questions about the reliability of the existing evidence on the psychosocial consequences of colorectal cancer screening.

PATIENT-RELATED OUTCOME MEASURES (2023)

Review Gastroenterology & Hepatology

Current and future colorectal cancer screening strategies

Aasma Shaukat et al.

Summary: This Review provides an overview of current CRC screening options worldwide, including colonoscopy and stool-based tests. It also highlights the key features of each modality and describes new screening tests under development.

NATURE REVIEWS GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY (2022)

Review Medicine, General & Internal

Screening for Colorectal Cancer: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

Jennifer S. Lin et al.

Summary: There are multiple screening options for colorectal cancer, each with varying levels of evidence in reducing cancer mortality, detecting cancer or precursor lesions, and risks of harms. This systematic review summarizes published evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for colorectal cancer in asymptomatic, community-dwelling adults to support the 2021 US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION (2021)

Review Medicine, General & Internal

The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

Matthew J. Page et al.

Summary: The PRISMA statement was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report the purpose, methods, and findings of their reviews. The updated PRISMA 2020 statement includes new reporting guidance, a 27-item checklist, an abstract checklist, and revised flow diagrams for reviews.

BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL (2021)

Article Gastroenterology & Hepatology

Adverse events of colonoscopy in a colorectal cancer screening program with fecal immunochemical testing: a population-based observational study

Bernard Denis et al.

Summary: This study aimed to assess adverse events associated with colonoscopy in the French colorectal cancer screening program using FIT. The study found that AEs were more frequent than usually estimated, with complications including hospitalization, surgery, and bleeding. Despite an increase in risk factors, the rate of AEs remained stable between gFOBT and FIT programs.

ENDOSCOPY INTERNATIONAL OPEN (2021)

Article Gastroenterology & Hepatology

Colonoscopy adverse events: are we getting the full picture?

Lasse Pedersen et al.

SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY (2020)

Article Medicine, General & Internal

The IARC Perspective on Colorectal Cancer Screening

Beatrice Lauby-Secretan et al.

NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE (2018)

Article Public, Environmental & Occupational Health

Colonoscopy-related complications in a nationwide immunochemical fecal occult blood test-based colorectal cancer screening program

Ellen M. Mikkelsen et al.

CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY (2018)

Review Medicine, General & Internal

Clinicians' Expectations of the Benefits and Harms of Treatments, Screening, and Tests A Systematic Review

Tammy C. Hoffmann et al.

JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE (2017)

Review Oncology

Colorectal cancer screening: Systematic review of screen-related morbidity and mortality

N. C. A. Vermeer et al.

CANCER TREATMENT REVIEWS (2017)

Review Gastroenterology & Hepatology

Post-Colonoscopy Complications: A Systematic Review, Time Trends, and Meta-Analysis of Population-Based Studies

Ankie Reumkens et al.

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY (2016)

Review Oncology

Screening for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Donna Fitzpatrick-Lewis et al.

CLINICAL COLORECTAL CANCER (2016)

Article Medicine, General & Internal

PRISMA harms checklist: improving harms reporting in systematic reviews

Liliane Zorzela et al.

BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL (2016)

Article Medicine, General & Internal

ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions

Jonathan A. C. Sterne et al.

BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL (2016)

Article Medicine, General & Internal

PRISMA harms checklist: improving harms reporting in systematic reviews

Liliane Zorzela et al.

BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL (2016)

Article Medicine, General & Internal

ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions

Jonathan A. C. Sterne et al.

BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL (2016)

Article Medicine, General & Internal

Population-Based Colonoscopy Screening for Colorectal Cancer A Randomized Clinical Trial

Michael Bretthauer et al.

JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE (2016)

Review Gastroenterology & Hepatology

Colorectal Cancer Screening in Average Risk Populations: Evidence Summary

Jill Tinmouth et al.

CANADIAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY (2016)

Article Medicine, General & Internal

A Value Framework for Cancer Screening: Advice for High-Value Care From the American College of Physicians

Russell P. Harris et al.

ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE (2015)

Review Medicine, General & Internal

Patients' Expectations of the Benefits and Harms of Treatments, Screening, and Tests A Systematic Review

Tammy C. Hoffmann et al.

JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE (2015)

Article Medicine, General & Internal

The Harms of Screening A Proposed Taxonomy and Application to Lung Cancer Screening

Russell P. Harris et al.

JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE (2014)

Review Medicine, General & Internal

Quantification of harms in cancer screening trials: literature review

Bruno Heleno et al.

BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL (2013)

Article Gastroenterology & Hepatology

A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: report of an ASGE workshop

Peter B. Cotton et al.

GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY (2010)

Review Medicine, General & Internal

The benefits and harms of screening for cancer with a focus on breast screening

John Brodersen et al.

POLSKIE ARCHIWUM MEDYCYNY WEWNETRZNEJ-POLISH ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE (2010)

Review Gastroenterology & Hepatology

Screening Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer in Asymptomatic People: A Meta-Analysis

Yaron Niv et al.

DIGESTIVE DISEASES AND SCIENCES (2008)

Review Medicine, General & Internal

Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and elaboration

Jan P. Vandenbroucke et al.

PLOS MEDICINE (2007)

Article Medicine, General & Internal

Better reporting of harms in randomized trials: An extension of the CONSORT statement

JPA Ioannidis et al.

ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE (2004)