Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Artificial Intelligence in Primary Care: call for articles
    • Social Care Integration with Primary Care: call for articles
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • BJGP CONFERENCE →
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
BJGP Open
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow BJGP Open on Instagram
  • Visit bjgp open on Bluesky
  • Blog
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
BJGP Open

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Artificial Intelligence in Primary Care: call for articles
    • Social Care Integration with Primary Care: call for articles
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • BJGP CONFERENCE →
Research

Public preferences for using quantitative faecal immunochemical test versus colonoscopy as diagnostic test for colorectal cancer: evidence from an online survey

Christian von Wagner, Wouter Verstraete, Yasemin Hirst, Brian D Nicholson, Sandro T Stoffel and Helga Laszlo
BJGP Open 2020; 4 (1): bjgpopen20X101007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen20X101007
Christian von Wagner
1 Reader, Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Christian von Wagner
  • For correspondence: c.wagner{at}ucl.ac.uk
Wouter Verstraete
2 Research Assistant Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
MSC
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yasemin Hirst
3 Senior Research Fellow, Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Brian D Nicholson
4 Senior Clinical Researcher, Nuffield Dept Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
BSc, MSc, MBChB, MRCGP
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sandro T Stoffel
5 Research Associate, Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
6 European Center of Pharmaceutical Medicine, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Helga Laszlo
7 Programme Manager, UCLH Cancer Collaborative, University College London Hospitals, London, UK
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Information

vol. 4 no. 1 bjgpopen20X101007
DOI 
https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen20X101007
PubMed 
32019773

Published By 
Royal College of General Practitioners
History 
  • Received September 10, 2019
  • Accepted September 12, 2019
  • Published online May 1, 2020.

Article Versions

  • Previous version (February 4, 2020 - 16:30).
  • You are viewing the most recent version of this article.
Copyright & Usage 
Copyright © 2020, The Authors This article is Open Access: CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Author Information

  1. Christian von Wagner, PhD1,*,
  2. Wouter Verstraete, MSC2,
  3. Yasemin Hirst, PhD3,
  4. Brian D Nicholson, BSc, MSc, MBChB, MRCGP4,
  5. Sandro T Stoffel, PhD5,6 and
  6. Helga Laszlo, MD7
  1. 1 Reader, Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
  2. 2 Research Assistant Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
  3. 3 Senior Research Fellow, Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
  4. 4 Senior Clinical Researcher, Nuffield Dept Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
  5. 5 Research Associate, Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
  6. 6 European Center of Pharmaceutical Medicine, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
  7. 7 Programme Manager, UCLH Cancer Collaborative, University College London Hospitals, London, UK
  1. ↵ *For correspondence:
    Christian von Wagner, c.wagner{at}ucl.ac.uk
View Full Text

Article usage

Article usage: February 2020 to November 2025

AbstractFullPdf
Feb 20207333164
Mar 20203412523
Apr 2020252914
May 2020224925
Jun 2020213027
Jul 202087419
Aug 202053619
Sep 2020145217
Oct 202066410
Nov 202074824
Dec 2020114419
Jan 2021114723
Feb 202173321
Mar 2021154112
Apr 2021141715
May 202172618
Jun 202143524
Jul 202131523
Aug 20212155
Sep 202114213
Oct 202123133
Nov 2021106526
Dec 202142915
Jan 202234315
Feb 20220378
Mar 202242715
Apr 20223379
May 202222320
Jun 202232913
Jul 20225195
Aug 202252010
Sep 202252531
Oct 202261611
Nov 202241817
Dec 2022194
Jan 202383117
Feb 20233257
Mar 2023103011
Apr 202361613
May 2023102615
Jun 20239157
Jul 202352121
Aug 202362222
Sep 2023103024
Oct 202382515
Nov 202354726
Dec 2023225149
Jan 2024474133
Feb 2024114328
Mar 202453638
Apr 20241517036
May 2024711728
Jun 202464023
Jul 202434629
Aug 202496035
Sep 202465942
Oct 202454536
Nov 202436031
Dec 202454638
Jan 202542817
Feb 2025146229
Mar 20253289
Apr 202585539
May 202594131
Jun 202533326
Jul 2025811059
Aug 202533428
Sep 2025713842
Oct 2025813548
Nov 2025417146

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

BJGP Open
Vol. 4, Issue 1
April 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Download PowerPoint
Email Article

Thank you for recommending BJGP Open.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Public preferences for using quantitative faecal immunochemical test versus colonoscopy as diagnostic test for colorectal cancer: evidence from an online survey
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from BJGP Open
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from BJGP Open.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Public preferences for using quantitative faecal immunochemical test versus colonoscopy as diagnostic test for colorectal cancer: evidence from an online survey
Christian von Wagner, Wouter Verstraete, Yasemin Hirst, Brian D Nicholson, Sandro T Stoffel, Helga Laszlo
BJGP Open 2020; 4 (1): bjgpopen20X101007. DOI: 10.3399/bjgpopen20X101007

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Public preferences for using quantitative faecal immunochemical test versus colonoscopy as diagnostic test for colorectal cancer: evidence from an online survey
Christian von Wagner, Wouter Verstraete, Yasemin Hirst, Brian D Nicholson, Sandro T Stoffel, Helga Laszlo
BJGP Open 2020; 4 (1): bjgpopen20X101007. DOI: 10.3399/bjgpopen20X101007
del.icio.us logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo Bluesky logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • Abstract
    • How this fits in
    • Introduction
    • Method
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Notes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • diagnostic tests
  • preference elicitation
  • choice experiment
  • colorectal neoplasms
  • primary health care
  • surveys and questionnaires

More in this TOC Section

  • Identifying and addressing UTI prevention barriers in primary care: a qualitative study
  • Depictions of the GP crisis: thematic analysis of UK newspapers pre-general election
  • Continuing professional development on planetary health for African family physicians: descriptive survey
Show more Research

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Latest articles
  • Authors & reviewers
  • Accessibility statement

RCGP

  • British Journal of General Practice
  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP Open
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP Open: research
  • Writing for BJGP Open: practice & policy
  • BJGP Open editorial process & policies
  • BJGP Open ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP Open

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Open access licence

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Open Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: bjgpopen@rcgp.org.uk

BJGP Open is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners

© 2025 BJGP Open

Online ISSN: 2398-3795