Longitudinal predictors of colorectal cancer screening among participants in a randomized controlled trial

Caitlin C. Murphy, Sally W. Vernon, Nicole M. Haddock, Melissa L. Anderson, Jessica Chubak, Beverly B. Green

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

21 Scopus citations


Objective: Few studies use longitudinal data to identify predictors of colorectal cancer screening (CRCS). We examined predictors of (1) initial CRCS during the first year of a randomized trial, and (2) repeat CRCS during the second year of the trial among those that completed FOBT in Year 1. Methods: The sample comprised 1247 participants of the Systems of Support to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening (SOS) Trial (Group Health Cooperative, August 2008 to November 2011). Potential predictors of CRCS were identified with logistic regression and included sociodemographics, health history, and validated scales of psychosocial constructs. Results: Prior CRCS (OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.99-3.52) and intervention group (Automated: OR 2.06 95% CI 1.43-2.95; Assisted: OR 4.03, 95% CI 2.69-6.03; Navigated: OR 5.64, 95% CI 3.74-8.49) were predictors of CRCS completion at Year 1. For repeat CRCS at Year 2, prior CRCS at baseline (OR 1.97, 95% CI 1.25-3.11), intervention group (Automated: OR 9.27, 95% CI 4.56-18.82; Assisted: OR 11.17, 95% CI 5.44-22.94; Navigated: OR 13.10, 95% CI 6.33-27.08), and self-efficacy (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.00-1.73) were significant predictors. Conclusion: Self-efficacy and prior CRCS are important predictors of future screening behavior. CRCS completion increased when access barriers were removed through interventions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)123-130
Number of pages8
JournalPreventive Medicine
StatePublished - Sep 2014


  • Behavioral intervention research
  • Cancer screening
  • Colorectal cancer
  • Longitudinal study

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Epidemiology
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health


Dive into the research topics of 'Longitudinal predictors of colorectal cancer screening among participants in a randomized controlled trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this