3 ms·

Thanks. That explanation on avoiding selection bias makes sense, but it seems like the study is saying those who choose to get a colonoscopy (whether invited or

by bryan0 4y ago

Thanks. That explanation on avoiding selection bias makes sense, but it seems like the study is saying those who choose to get a colonoscopy (whether invited or not) are 50% less likely to die of colon cancer. Also I’m not sure if the article mentioned this, but the data seems to imply that the % of people who opted to get a colonoscopy was similar in the invited and control group.

akvadrako 4y ago
That suggests something strange though – that those who were invited but non-tested were more likely to die of colon cancer than non-invitie non-testers.
- zerocrates 4y ago
  I suppose that by refusing to get a colonoscopy even when specifically prompted to do so, you're maybe sorting yourself into a more "unhealthy" group than the general population of non-colonoscopy-havers.
  - robertlagrant 4y ago
    That would make the outcome less surprising.
- bluGill 4y ago
  It would be unethical to refuse to invite someone with a family history of colon cancer. Thus I think it is perfectly reasonable to assume there is something different.