The study was conducted using patients waiting in outpatient settings. They were given a packet that outlined the various methods of screening and asked the patients to choose which method they would prefer. It also asked questions about whether they would prefer screening or no screening or different screening. It had a section for demographic information as well for the purpose of analysis.

Currently, the overall number of patients screened is low. (15,16,18) With emphasis on shared decision-making and the new reimbursement approval by Medicare, colonoscopy is more likely to be offered as a screening procedure to average-risk patients. We expected that more patients would opt for colonoscopy as the more complete and less frequent examination. The response rate to our questionnaires was 64%, which is comparable to other studies. (22,23) Most of our patients who had not been screened in the past preferred sigmoidoscopy (Raina, 2004)."

In my opinion this was an excellent paper for several...

The first reason it was good was the need. It is known that people avoid screening for colon cancer and that hesitance causes many deaths each year. This article puts numbers to the problem so that readers will understand how significant the reluctance to screen has become.
It was written in a way that was interesting and easy to understand. It provided concrete information written in a way that the average person could understand it which is unusual for a medical journal article.

I believe the article was well worth publication as it casts light on a very important topic that people don't generally discuss. The methods of screening can be embarrassing for some people to talk about and the article provides the information needed so that medical professionals can encourage their patients to allow screening.

REFERENCE

Screening preferences for colorectal cancer: a patient demographic study.(Original Article) Southern Medical Journal; 3/1/2004; Raina, Ashu