| Popis: |
Sharifah Saffinas Syed Soffian,1 Azmawati Mohammed Nawi,1 Rozita Hod,1 Mohd Rizal Abdul Manaf,1 Huan-Keat Chan,2 Muhammad Radzi Abu Hassan2 1Department of Community Health, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, 56000, Malaysia; 2Clinical Research Center, Sultanah Bahiyah Hospital, Alor Setar, 05400, Kedah, MalaysiaCorrespondence: Azmawati Mohammed Nawi, Department of Community Health, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, 56000, Malaysia, Tel +60 3 9145 8408, Email azmawati@ppukm.ukm.edu.myAbstract: Regardless of the high global burden of colorectal cancer (CRC), the uptake of CRC screening varies across countries. This systematic review aimed to provide a picture of the disparities in recommendations for CRC screening in average-risk individuals using an ecobiosocial approach. It was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The literature search was conducted through Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and EBSCOHost. Full-text guidelines which were published between 2011 and 2021, along with guidelines which provided recommendations on CRC screening in average-risk individuals, were included in the review. However, guidelines focusing only on a single screening modality were excluded. Fourteen guidelines fulfilling the eligibility criteria were retained for the final review and analysis. Quality assessment of each guideline was performed using the AGREE II instrument. Disparities in guidelines identified in this review were classified into ecological (screening modalities and strategies), biological (recommended age, gender and ethnicities), and social (smoking history, socioeconomic status, and behavior) factors. In general, unstandardized practices in CRC screening for average-risk individuals are likely attributable to the inconsistent and non-specific recommendations in the literature. This review calls on stakeholders and policymakers to review the existing colorectal cancer screening practices and pursue standardization.Keywords: colorectal cancer, screening, guidelines, ecology, biology, social, disparities |
