Reducing the Social Gradient in Uptake of the NHS Colorectal Cancer Screening Programme Using a Narrative-Based Information Leaflet: A Cluster-Randomised Trial

Table 5

Proportion of individuals who were adequately screened^†, according to IMD quintile^‡ and screening round.

	Prevalent first time invitees		Prevalent previous nonresponders		Incident episodes
	SI	SI + N	SI	SI + N	SI	SI + N
	% ()	% ()	% ()	% ()	% ()	% ()
Adequately screened	49.8 (6,231)	50.2 (7,678)	14.3 (3,284)	14.0 (3,113)	85.7 (35,389)	85.6 (31,031)
1st quintile (least deprived)	58.0 (1,585)	58.9 (1,953)	17.8 (705)	16.3 (685)	87.9 (9,121)	88.0 (8,367)
2nd quintile	54.5 (1,494)	55.9 (1,827)	16.1 (775)	16.3 (705)	87.2 (8,811)	86.7 (7,721)
3rd quintile	50.5 (1,312)	51.4 (1,601)	14.2 (665)	15.7 (709)	85.7 (7,624)	86.1 (6,601)
4th quintile	44.7 (1,011)	44.4 (1,282)	13.1 (598)	12.5 (552)	83.7 (5,474)	84.1 (4,701)
5th quintile (most deprived)	37.9 (801)	37.3 (979)	11.1 (527)	9.6 (448)	81.0 (4,252)	79.8 (3,539)

SI: standard information; SI + N: standard information plus narrative leaflet.
^†Returned a gFOBt kit (or kits) within 18 weeks of being sent the invitation, with a definitive “normal” (no further investigation required) or “abnormal” (requiring referral for further investigation, usually colonoscopy) screening test result available at the time of data extraction.
^‡546 (274 SI and 272 SI + N) individuals missing an IMD score, 301 of these were adequately screened (149 SI and 152 SI + N).