Neoplasms

Skin and Connective Tissue Diseases

All Conditions

Urinary Tract, Sexual Organs, and Pregnancy Conditions

Digestive System Diseases

Breast Neoplasms

Uterine Cervical Neoplasms

Colorectal Neoplasms

Intestinal Neoplasms

Gastrointestinal Neoplasms

Digestive System Neoplasms

Gastrointestinal Diseases

Colonic Diseases

Intestinal Diseases

Rectal Diseases

Uterine Neoplasms

Genital Neoplasms, Female

Urogenital Neoplasms

Uterine Cervical Diseases

Uterine Diseases

Genital Diseases, Female

Genital Diseases

Urogenital Diseases

Female Urogenital Diseases

Pregnancy Complications

Female Urogenital Diseases and Pregnancy Complications

Group 1: sending a standard invitation signed by the coordinating doctor (send by the structure responsible for organized screenings)

Intervention : Normal invitation

Group 2: Sending a revised invitation ( text, layout) signed by the coordinating doctor (send by the structure responsible for organized screenings)

Intervention : revised invitation signed by the coordinating doctor

Group 3: Sending a revised invitation signed by the attending physician (send by the structure responsible for organized screenings)

Intervention : Revised invitation signed by the attending physician

No modification and signed by the coordinating doctor as usual

Normal invitation

Invitation with revised text and layout and signed by the coordinating doctor as usual

revised invitation signed by the coordinating doctor

Revised invitation signed by the attending physician

Ken HAGUENOER

Our goal is to evaluate, in France, the effectiveness (in terms of participation) of the general practitioner involvement (signature) and a more personalized communication in invitation letters to organized screening of breast, colorectal and cervical cancers.

The hypothesis on which this project is based is that communication is probably more effective if the "receiver" feels personally targeted by invitation letters (Dear Martin, I am writing ...) and if he knows "the issuer "(his general practitioner rather an unknown person).

Randomized Trial Evaluating the Effectiveness of the General Practitioner Involvement in Cancer Screening Invitations

Randomized Trial Evaluating the Effectiveness of a "Targeted Communication" With the General Practitioner Involvement in Cancer Screening Invitation Letters

The participation / non participation will be measured for each cancer screening (breast, colorectal and cervical) :

* 9 months after the invitation letters for breast and colorectal cancers
* 12 months after the invitation letters for cervical cancer

The participation rate is defined as the number of people having participated, divided by the total number of people in the group or subgroup considered.

Analysis by comparing the participation rates between groups (Group 1, Group 2 and Group 3) and sub-groups will be done.

University Hospital, Tours

Study title	NCT ID	Conditions	Interventions	Eligibility	Organization
Randomized Trial Evaluating the Effectiveness of the General Practitioner Involvement in Cancer Screening Invitations	NCT02367001	Breast Cancer Colorectal Canc... Cervical Cancer	Normal invitati... revised invitat... Revised invitat...	25 Years - 74 Years	University Hospital, Tours
Randomized Trial Evaluating the Effectiveness of the General Practitioner Involvement in Cancer Screening Invitations	NCT02367001	Breast Cancer Colorectal Canc... Cervical Cancer	Normal invitati... revised invitat... Revised invitat...	25 Years - 74 Years	University Hospital, Tours
Randomized Trial Evaluating the Effectiveness of the General Practitioner Involvement in Cancer Screening Invitations	NCT02367001	Breast Cancer Colorectal Canc... Cervical Cancer	Normal invitati... revised invitat... Revised invitat...	25 Years - 74 Years	University Hospital, Tours

Spots Global Cancer Trial Database for normal invitation