On the public citation graph

When gold standards are not so golden: prevalence bias in randomized trials on endoscopic colorectal cancer screening

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-023-01031-2
0 signed · 38 inferred · view as graph

Inferred edges come from two machine sources: sweeps of open repository metadata (mostly SSRN and Zenodo), and a bulk OpenAlex citation snapshot. Every row below is labelled with the one it came from. Neither is a complete citation index — absence here is not evidence of absence.

Is this your work? Sign in with ORCID and put your name on the claims that are yours.
Claim with ORCID
Reference health. See whether every reference in this work resolves to a known work and none has been retracted — and get a dated CiteStamped badge you can embed.
See reference health

What this work says

Outgoing claims: the papers this work cites, builds on, or argues with.

inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.8266openalex-snapshot
Effect of Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening on Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2021.5746openalex-snapshot
Colorectal Cancer Screening
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0215(19971009)73:2<220::aid-ijc10>3.0.co;2-jopenalex-snapshot
Colorectal cancer mass-screening: Estimation of faecal occult blood test sensitivity, taking into account cancer mean sojourn time
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.33916openalex-snapshot
Trends in the incidence of early‐onset colorectal cancer in all 50 United States from 2001 through 2017
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101793openalex-snapshot
Intention to probe into the colonoscopy trial: is it the procedure or the trial that failed?
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.05.008openalex-snapshot
In the era of widespread endoscopy use, randomized trials may strongly underestimate the effects of colorectal cancer screening
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(17)30396-3openalex-snapshot
Long term effects of once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening after 17 years of follow-up: the UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening randomised controlled trial
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(21)00199-6openalex-snapshot
Colorectal cancer incidence, mortality, and stage distribution in European countries in the colorectal cancer screening era: an international population-based study
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1016/s2468-1253(18)30358-3openalex-snapshot
Effect of flexible sigmoidoscopy screening on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: long-term follow-up of the randomised US PLCO cancer screening trial
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa2208375openalex-snapshot
Effect of Colonoscopy Screening on Risks of Colorectal Cancer and Related Death
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmsr1714643openalex-snapshot
The IARC Perspective on Colorectal Cancer Screening
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwr188openalex-snapshot
Sojourn Time of Preclinical Colorectal Cancer by Sex and Age: Estimates From the German National Screening Colonoscopy Database
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009687openalex-snapshot
Estimating Sensitivity and Sojourn Time in Screening for Colorectal Cancer: A Comparison of Statistical Approaches
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g2467openalex-snapshot
Effect of screening sigmoidoscopy and screening colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2022-327736openalex-snapshot
Global burden of colorectal cancer in 2020 and 2040: incidence and mortality estimates from GLOBOCAN
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21395openalex-snapshot
Colorectal cancer statistics, 2017
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers12061409openalex-snapshot
Utilisation of Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests in European Countries by Type of Screening Offer: Results from the European Health Interview Survey
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.7326/m21-0977openalex-snapshot
Long-Term Follow-up of the Italian Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening Trial
inferredcites →https://doi.org/10.7326/m22-0835openalex-snapshot
15-Year Benefits of Sigmoidoscopy Screening on Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality

What points at this work

Incoming claims: where this work appears in other papers’ reference lists and arguments.

inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4533596openalex-extracted
The Underestimated Preventive Effects of Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening: Re-Analysis and Pooled Analysis of Randomised Trials
inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4662335openalex-extracted
Unravelling the Effects of Screening Colonoscopy on Colorectal Cancer Early Detection and Prevention:Reanalysis of the NordICC Trial
inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.1002/cac2.12642openalex-snapshot
Unraveling the effects of screening colonoscopy on colorectal cancer early detection and prevention: the NordICC trial revisited
inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.35322openalex-snapshot
Potential for enhancing efficacy of screening colonoscopy by lowering starting ages and extending screening intervals: A modelling study for Germany
inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-023-01065-6openalex-snapshot
Re: Interpreting epidemiologic studies of colorectal cancer prevention
inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-023-01070-9openalex-snapshot
Authors’ Reply: Interpreting epidemiologic studies of colorectal cancer prevention
inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-024-01120-wopenalex-snapshot
The underestimated preventive effects of flexible sigmoidoscopy screening: re-analysis and meta-analysis of randomized trials
inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-025-01269-yopenalex-snapshot
Looking at randomized trials with the critical eyes of epidemiologists: the case of screening colonoscopy
inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-025-01301-1openalex-snapshot
Choosing a sensible contrast makes “prevalence bias” irrelevant in screening colonoscopy trials
inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-025-01303-zopenalex-snapshot
No “prevalence bias” in randomized controlled trials on colorectal cancer screening: the importance of clarifying the research question
inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-025-01319-5openalex-snapshot
Overcoming prevalence bias in colorectal cancer screening studies by sensible analyses rather than ignoring it or giving up relevant effect measures
inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.111669openalex-snapshot
Accounting for differential exclusions in the Nordic-European initiative on colorectal cancer trial discloses stronger-than-reported effects of screening colonoscopy
inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwaf069openalex-snapshot
Misleading and avoidable: design-induced biases in observational studies evaluating cancer screening—the example of site-specific effectiveness of screening colonoscopy
inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djaf313openalex-snapshot
Early-detection and prevention effects of screening sigmoidoscopy: evidence from randomized trials revisited
inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12943-026-02658-xopenalex-snapshot
The evolving role of OMICS in gastrointestinal tumor biology and clinical practice
inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.14309/ajg.0000000000003814openalex-snapshot
Effects of Screening Colonoscopy: Evidence From Observational and Interventional Studies
inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4048301/v1openalex-snapshot
Effects of screening colonoscopy in preventing colorectal cancer: re-analysis of the NordICC trial
inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4848980openalex-snapshot
Accounting for Differential Exclusions in the Nordicc Trial Discloses Stronger-than-Reported Effects of Screening Colonoscopy
inferred← citeshttps://doi.org/10.2147/jhl.s506767openalex-snapshot
The Erosion of Healthcare and Scientific Integrity: A Growing Concern
Editorial review for independent work. ICSAC — the Institute for Complexity Science and Advanced Computing — runs a structured editorial panel for researchers publishing outside journals, and publishes on CiteStamp rails. Submission is free and goes through ORCID: icsacinstitute.org/submit.