Skip to main content

Table 4 Predicted choice probabilities for the different screening alternatives with varying scenarios for the nanopill

From: Public stated preferences and predicted uptake for genome-based colorectal cancer screening

Screening alternative Sensitivity Specificity Complication rate Frequency Predicted probability (95% CI)
No screening - - - - 42.7% (41.2% to 44.3%)
Colonoscopya 90% 90% 100/10000 10 years 39.2% (36.8% to 41.6%)
Sigmoidoscopyb 70% 90% 10/10000 5 years 37.5% (35.2% to 39.8%)
iFOBTc 80% 90% None 2 years 75.8% (73.9% to 77.7%)
1: Nanopilld 100% 100% 1/10000 Annual 78.8% (77.0% to 80.5%)
2: Nanopilld 100% 100% 1/10000 2 years 81.0% (79.4% to 82.6%)
3: Nanopilld 100% 90% 1/10000 Annual 77.3% (75.4% to 79.2%)
4: Nanopilld 90% 100% 1/10000 Annual 73.8% (71.7% to 75.7%)
5: Nanopilld 95% 95% 1/10000 Annual 75.6% (73.7% to 77.4%)
6: Nanopilld 90% 95% 1/10000 2 years 75.6% (73.7% to 77.4%)
  1. aDiet plus laxatives, long tube with sedation; bEnemas, short tube; cNo preparation, stool; dLaxatives, pill.