Editor's Choice

What’s the point?

BMJ 2011; 342 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d3620 (Published 08 June 2011) Cite this as: BMJ 2011;342:d3620
  1. Trish Groves, deputy editor, BMJ
  1. tgroves{at}bmj.com

In Anke Steckelberg and colleagues’ randomised controlled trial in Germany, comparing the effect of evidence based information about screening for colorectal cancer with that of standard information, the primary outcome was “informed choice” among nearly 1500 people eligible for screening (doi:10.1136/bmj.d3193). This outcome, adapted from a validated instrument and assessed by questionnaires, was a composite of knowledge + attitude + uptake of screening (actual and planned uptake). Unsurprisingly, more participants in the intervention group made an informed choice (44% v 12.8% in the control group, 99% confidence interval 25.7% to 36.7%; P<0.001). But, counterintuitively, the …

View Full Text

Sign in

Log in through your institution

Subscribe