Cancer Screening: Group Education for Clients — Colorectal Cancer

Findings and Recommendations

The Community Preventive Services Task Force (CPSTF) finds insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of group education in increasing screening for colorectal cancer, based on the small number of studies with methodologic limitations and inconsistent findings.

The full CPSTF Finding and Rationale Statement and supporting documents for Increasing Cancer Screening: Group Education for Clients [for Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancers] are available in The Community Guide Collection on CDC Stacks.

Intervention

Group education conveys information on indications for, benefits of, and ways to overcome barriers to screening with the goal of informing, encouraging, and motivating participants to seek recommended screening. Group education is usually conducted by health professionals or by trained lay people who use presentations or other teaching aids in a lecture or interactive format, and often incorporate role modeling or other methods. Group education can be given to a variety of groups, in different settings, and by different types of educators with different backgrounds and styles.

About The Systematic Review

The CPSTF finding is based on evidence from a Community Guide systematic review published in 2008 (Baron et al., 1 study, search period 1966-2004) combined with more recent evidence (1 study, search period 2004-2008). The systematic review was conducted on behalf of the CPSTF by a team of specialists in systematic review methods, and in research, practice, and policy related to cancer prevention and control.

Study Characteristics

• Both studies assessed intervention effects on colorectal cancer screening by FOBT.
• One study offered interactive group sessions delivered by peer facilitators, and the other offered sessions delivered by promotoras with an in-class format.
• Populations included Latinas, African Americans, and white Americans.
• Interventions were delivered in churches or homes in the community.

Summary of Results

Two studies qualified for the updated systematic review.

• Screening by FOBT: median increase of 4.4 percentage points (range -13 to 37; 2 studies with 4 study arms)

Summary of Economic Evidence

An economic review of this intervention was not conducted because CPSTF did not have enough information to determine if the intervention works.

Implementation Considerations and Resources

CPSTF did not have enough evidence to determine whether the intervention is or is not effective. This does not mean that the intervention does not work, but rather that additional research is needed to determine whether or not the intervention is effective.

Crosswalks

Find programs from the Evidence-Based Cancer Control Programs EBCCP website that align with this systematic review. (What is EBCCP?)