Abstract
Background
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common type of cancer worldwide, which motivates researchers to investigate risk factors involved, its symptoms and screening methods essential for early detection and prevention. This study examined fourth and fifth year pharmacy students’ awareness regarding CRC to achieve the purpose of collecting data to guide and shape curriculum adjustments and improve community-based educational initiatives.
Methods
An online cross-sectional survey was administered between January 6th and March 9th, 2025 with fourth- and fifth-year pharmacy students from five pharmacy faculties located in Türkiye who agreed to participate in the study. Within the scope of the study, knowledge of CRC risk factors, symptoms, screening and barriers to colorectal cancer screening were explored.
Results
The participants of the study included 532 students attending five pharmacy faculties located in different parts of Türkiye. The mean score for “knowledge about CRC risk factor” was (± SD) 11.54 (± 3.58), and 85.2% (n = 453) of the participants had “good level of knowledge” about risk factors. The mean “CRC symptom” score (± SD) was 4.39 (± 2.10). In addition, 60.7% (n = 323) of the participants were found to have poor level of knowledge about the symptoms of the disease. The mean score for “CRC screening” (± SD) was 1.44 (± 0.70). 93.2% (496) of the participants reported poor level knowledge about screening. “Worrying about a bad result” was identified as the primary barrier to getting fecal occult blood test (FOBT) and colonoscopy. More than half of the participants (n = 318, 59.8%) stated that they acquired the information about CRC from the curricula most.
Conclusion
This study indicated that students’ knowledge about CRC symptoms and screening was poor while their knowledge about CRC risks was good. Females and nonsmokers had remarkably more CRC risk information. Sociodemographic variables did not significantly affect CRC symptom and screening knowledge. “Worrying about a bad result” was the biggest FOBT and colonoscopy barrier. According to these findings, it is recommended that faculties should integrate CRC awareness courses into their curricula. Additionally, more emphasis should be placed on other educational interventions such as social media, television and brochure distribution.
Supplementary Information
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-025-08261-w.
Keywords: Awareness, Colorectal cancer, Pharmacy students, Türkiye
Background
Colorectal cancer (CRC) ranks as the third most common cancer worldwide, with remarkably higher incidence rates in developed countries. However, these rates are now rising in developing countries as their lifestyles and diets increasingly resemble those of wealthy countries [1]. In Türkiye, colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer type among the cancer cases diagnosed in 2022 with 21,718 cases, and the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths [2].
Cultural, social, and lifestyle-related factors considerably contribute to the development of CRC. Risk factors for CRC include a positive family history, individuals over the age of 50, a low-fiber or high-fat diet and red meat consumption. Furthermore, inflammatory bowel disease has been determined as a factor that increases the risk of colorectal cancer. Symptoms of colorectal cancer include changes in bowel habits, the presence of blood in stool, and unintentional weight loss [3].
Screening for early diagnosis is very critical because it increases recovery rates by allowing the early detection of precancerous polyps and CRC in its asymptomatic stages. CRC screening is strongly recommended for all individuals older than 50. However, individuals with a family history of CRC should begin screening at the age of 40 [4]. Currently, the CRC national screening program in Türkiye advises that all individuals aged between 50 and 70 undergo a biannual fecal occult blood test (FOBT) and a colonoscopy every ten years. It is also recommended that those over than 70 years old discontinue screening if they have received negative results in their last two fecal occult blood tests [5].
The optimal screening approach should display high sensitivity and specificity in addition to being cost-effective and readily available. Currently, colonoscopy is the most reliable method for colorectal cancer screening with a sensitivity of 95%, and it is recommended for those older than 50 years old in ten years’ intervals. Moreover, the excision of precancerous and tiny malignant cells is one of the most significant advantages of colonoscopy [6]. However, invasiveness, intestinal preparation before the procedure, and the necessity of sedation are among its drawbacks. Despite its accessibility, colonoscopy has a reputation of being an expensive procedure, which makes it a relatively less preferred screening method. Flexible sigmoidoscopy resembles colonoscopy with its considerable number of advantages and drawbacks [7]. However, there are some differences between these two procedures. For example, flexible sigmoidoscopy allows doctors to examine the last part of the colon without requiring anesthesia or enema [6]. Similarly, fecal occult blood test is a commonly employed non-invasive method to detect CRC, and it is a cost-effective approach when compared to alternative screening approaches. On the other hand, limited sensitivity and specificity of fecal occult blood are considered a drawback of the procedure [8].
Barriers to colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) include lack of awareness, insufficient guidance by physicians for screening, fear of undesirable screening results, and the absence of colorectal cancer symptoms. The relatively longer duration of screening is also listed as an impediment to CRCS [9].
Raising awareness about risk factors and screening procedures for colorectal cancer is essential for a considerable decrease in incidence rates. This study aims to explore 4th and 5th-year pharmacy students’ knowledge and awareness about CRC and collect data that can trigger necessary curriculum adjustments and enhance community-based educational initiatives.
Materials and methods
Study design and setting
An online cross-sectional survey was administered from January 6 to March 9, 2025 to 4th and 5th-year pharmacy students from five universities in Türkiye who volunteered to participate in the study. The study was approved by the Anadolu University Non-Interventional Clinical Trials Ethics Committee (No: E-54380210-050.99.99-792671). In this study, the knowledge about CRC risk factor (1), symptoms (2), screening (3) and barriers to colorectal cancer screening (4) were examined. The participants were asked to sign a written informed consent form before they filled out the survey.
Study population
The study included fourth and fifth-year students from five pharmacy faculties in Türkiye who agreed to participate in the study.
According to the sample size calculation (Raosoft sample size calculator), a minimum of 381 participants were planned to take part in the study with a 95% confidence interval, a 5% margin of error and a 50% response rate. x = Z(c/100)2r(100-r), n = Nx/((N-1)E2 + x), E = Sqrt[(N − n)x/n(N-1)]. N is the population size, r is the proportion of responses of interest, and Z(c/100) c is the critical value for the confidence level [10]. Convenience sampling method was preferred as the sampling method.
Study procedure
The questions in the survey were inspired from those used in the surveys employed in the similar studies to ensure the validity and reliability [11, 12]. Expert opinions were received from two pharmacists who are considered authorities in their disciplines. They evaluated the survey questions in terms of their contents. Minor modifications were made according to the feedback received. A pilot study was conducted with 30 fourth and fifth year students to obtain their feedback for the questions regarding their scope and clarity. Due to the clarity of the questions, no modifications were necessary, and the form was finalized accordingly (supplementary). Cronbach’s alpha value was calculated as 0.832 for risk factors, 0.896 for symptoms, 0.824 for screening, which indicates good internal consistency.
The survey consists of 54 questions. The first five questions aim to collect sociodemographic information while the following seventeen questions address colorectal cancer risk factors. Nine questions focus on colorectal cancer symptoms and the purpose of four questions is to collect data about knowledge regarding colorectal cancer screening. Also, eight questions are about FOBT-related barriers and eleven questions about colonoscopy-related barriers. There are questions asking whether the participants heard about colorectal cancer beforehand, how they learned about CRC (the main source of information), their beliefs about whether it is a common disease or not, whether they or any family member had already undergone screening, and what they think about the idea that early diagnosis through the use of screening methods could extend a person’s life.
The survey was developed using Google Forms and sent to students via their class WhatsApp groups in advance. Students were asked to fill out the survey, which normally takes 10 to 15 minutes to complete. The first page contained brief information about the research and the consent declaration, which writes: “I have reviewed all the information provided by the researchers. I acknowledge that my participation is optional and that I may withdraw at any time without justification and at no expense. I willingly consent to participate in this study”. The participant is allowed to proceed only if he/she consents to participate in the study voluntarily.
Statistical analysis
The data were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 26 through descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation, median, interquartile range, frequency and percentages). The data’s normality was checked using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Student’s T-test was employed for regularly distributed data, whereas Mann-Whitney U was utilized for non-normally distributed variables when comparing two groups. The Chi-square test was preferred to compare categorical variables. P value lower than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
In the knowledge section, the correct responses received 1 point, while incorrect or ‘‘I don’t know’’ responses received 0 point. Knowledge score was calculated by assigning one point for every correct response to the questions. They were then converted to percentages. A score higher than or equal to 50% was classified as “good level of knowledge”, while scores lower than 50% were considered “poor level of knowledge”, which is also the criteria followed in similar studies [13–15]. A score equal to or higher than 9 for factors that increase the risk of colorectal cancer indicated “a good level of knowledge”, a score equal to or higher than 5 for colorectal cancer symptoms meant “a good level of knowledge” and a score equal to or higher than 3 for colorectal cancer screening showed “a good level of knowledge”.
Results
A total of 532 students attending five pharmacy faculties in Türkiye participated in the study. The majority of the participant students were female (n = 374, 70.3%) and 5th year students (n = 404, 75.9%). Demographic information about the participant students is displayed in Table 1.
Table 1.
Demographic information about the participants
| Variables | n (%) |
|---|---|
| Age median (IQR) | 23 (22–24) |
| Gender | |
| Female | 374 (70.3) |
| Male | 158 (29.7) |
| Year of study | |
| Fourth year | 128 (24.1) |
| Fifth year | 404 (75.9) |
| Regular smoking | |
| Yes | 135 (25.4) |
| No | 397 (74.6) |
| Regular alcohol use | |
| Yes | 133 (25) |
| No | 399 (75) |
Categorical variables reported as frequency (percent, IQR Interquartile range)
492 (92.5%) of the students who participated in the study stated that they heard of CRC before and obtained information about it from multiple sources. More than half of the participants (n = 318, 59.8%) learned about CRC in their courses as part of the curriculum as the main source of information, which is followed by family and friends (n = 177, 33.3%), social media (n = 174, 32.7%), books, magazines, and brochures (n = 86, 16.1%), television or radio (n = 75, 14.1%), and doctors (n = 64, 12.0%) as other sources. 182 students (34.2%) reported that CRC is a common disease, but the majority of the students (n = 283, 53.2%) chose the option ‘I don’t know/not sure.’
Table 2 shows the participants’ knowledge about CRC risk factors. Stress (93.6%), family history (genetic) (91.0%), and colon polyps (89.3%) were the three most important risk factors reported by the participant students respectively. The mean CRC risk factors score (± standard deviation) was 11.54 (± 3.58). Thus, 85.2% (n = 453) of the participants had good level of knowledge about risk factors.
Table 2.
Students’ knowledge about colorectal cancer risk factor
| Questions | Yes (n, %) | No (n, %) | Don’t know (n, %) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 444 (83.5) | 30 (5.6) | 58 (10.9) |
| Physical inactivity | 457 (85.9) | 30 (5.6) | 45 (8.5) |
| Stress | 498 (93.6) | 7 (1.3) | 27 (5.1) |
| Excess weight | 428 (80.5) | 30 (5.6) | 74 (13.9) |
| Cigarette | 468 (88.0) | 19 (3.6) | 45 (8.5) |
| Alcohol | 474 (89.1) | 13 (2.4) | 45 (8.5) |
| Having a family history of colorectal cancer (genetic) | 484 (91.0) | 13 (2.4) | 35 (6.6) |
| Hypertension | 134 (25.2) | 137 (25.8) | 261 (49.1) |
| Diabetes mellitus | 202 (38.0) | 95 (17.9) | 235 (44.2) |
| Colon polyps | 475 (89.3) | 11 (2.1) | 46 (8.6) |
| Colon ulcers | 471 (88.5) | 16 (3.0) | 45 (8.5) |
| Inflammatory bowel disease | 457 (85.9) | 20 (3.8) | 55 (10.3) |
| Iron deficiency | 200 (37.6) | 103 (19.4) | 229 (43) |
| Consumption of fatty foods and red meat | 316 (59.4) | 74 (13.9) | 142 (26.7) |
| Fruit and vegetable consumption | 104 (19.5) | 328 (61.7) | 100 (18.8) |
| Repeated x-ray exposure | 287 (53.9) | 66 (12.4) | 179 (33.6) |
| Gluten | 243 (45.7) | 81 (15.2) | 208 (39.1) |
Categorical variables reported as frequency (percent)
Table 3 shows students’ knowledge about CRC symptoms. Among the symptoms of CRC, the three most frequently mentioned symptoms were rectal bleeding (87.2%), persistent abdominal pain or discomfort (65.8%) and change in bowel habits (diarrhea/constipation) (56.2%). The mean CRC symptoms score (± standard deviation) was calculated as 4.39 (± 2.10). Finally, 60.7% (n = 323) of the participants had poor level of knowledge about symptoms.
Table 3.
Students’ knowledge about colorectal cancer symptoms
| Questions | Yes (n,%) | No (n,%) |
|---|---|---|
| Dark-colored stool | 224 (42.1) | 308 (57.9) |
| Rectal bleeding | 464 (87.2) | 68 (12.8) |
| Change in bowel habits (diarrhea/constipation) | 299 (56.2) | 233 (43.8) |
| Nausea and vomiting | 148 (27.8) | 384 (72.2) |
| Tenesmus (Feeling that the intestines are not completely empty) | 262 (49.2) | 270 (50.8) |
| Unexplained weight loss | 246 (46.2) | 286 (53.8) |
| Persistent abdominal pain or discomfort | 350 (65.8) | 182 (34.2) |
| Unexplained fatigue/weakness | 213 (40.0) | 319 (60.0) |
| Loss of appetite | 132 (24.8) | 400 (75.2) |
Categorical variables reported as frequency (percent)
14 participants (2.6%) stated that they had already undergone colorectal cancer screening, and 81 (15.2%) students reported that their family had a history of colorectal cancer screening. Although the majority of the students (89.1%) indicated that early diagnosis with screening methods can ensure longevity, and the number of students who knew the appropriate screening age and the correct colonoscopy frequency was 11.1% (n = 59) and 1.5% (n = 8) respectively (Table 4). The mean CRC screening score (± standard deviation) was 1.44 (± 0.70). 93.2% (n = 496) of the participants had poor level of knowledge about CRC screening.
Table 4.
Students’ knowledge about colorectal cancer screening
| Questions | n (%) |
|---|---|
| Do you think that the early diagnosis of colorectal cancer through the use of screening methods can extend a person’s life? | |
| Yes | 474 (89.1) |
| No | 15 (2.8) |
| Don’t know | 43 (8.1) |
| What is the most appropriate age range to start colorectal cancer screening? | |
| 30–39 years | 258 (48.5) |
| 40–49 years | 201 (37.8) |
| 50–59 years | 59 (11.1) |
| 60–69 years | 11 (2.1) |
| 70–79 years | 3 (0.6) |
| In individuals of appropriate age for colorectal cancer screening, how often should the fecal occult blood test be repeated? | |
| 1 year | 174 (32.7) |
| 2 year | 207 (38.9) |
| 3 year | 101 (19.0) |
| 5 year | 42 (7.9) |
| 10 year | 8 (1.5) |
| How often should a colonoscopy be repeated in individuals of appropriate age for colorectal cancer screening? | |
| 1 year | 131 (24.6) |
| 2 year | 171 (32.1) |
| 3 year | 110 (20.7) |
| 5 year | 89 (16.7) |
| 10 year | 31 (5.8) |
Categorical variables reported as frequency (percent)
The primary barrier to getting a FOBT and colonoscopy was stated as “worrying about a bad result”. The second barrier to the FOBT was considered to be “the test is thought to be embarrassing”, while the second barrier to undergoing a colonoscopy was listed as “fear of the procedure being painful” (Figs. 1 and 2).
Fig. 1.
Barriers to performing fecal occult blood tests reported by students. Categorical variables reported as frequency (percent)
Fig. 2.
Barriers to colonoscopy reported by students. Categorical variables reported as frequency (percent)
Age (p = 0.59 and 0.19; respectively), gender (0.68 and 0.38; respectively), year of study (p = 0.44 and 0.28; respectively), regular smoking (0.31 and 0.65; respectively), and regular alcohol use (p = 0.72 and 0.23; respectively) did not significantly affect the level of knowledge about colorectal cancer symptoms and screening (Table 5).
Table 5.
Comparison of sociodemographic variables with level of knowledge about colorectal cancer risks, symptoms and screening
| Variables | CRC risks knowledge level | CRC symptoms knowledge level | CRC screening knowledge level | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Poor | Good | p | Poor | Good | p | Poor | Good | p | |
| Age median (IQR) | 23 (22–24) | 23 (22–24) | 0.47 | 23 (22–24) | 23 (22–24) | 0.59 | 23 (22–24) | 23 (22–24) | 0.19 |
| Gender | |||||||||
| Female | 41 (11.0) | 333 (89.0) | < 0.001 | 225 (60.2) | 149 (39.8) | 0.68 | 351 (93.9) | 23 (6.1) | 0.38 |
| Male | 38 (21.1) | 120 (75.9) | 98 (62.0) | 60 (38.0) | 145 (91.8) | 13 (8.2) | |||
| Year of study | |||||||||
| Fourth year | 15 (11.7) | 113 (88.3) | 0.25 | 74 (57.8) | 54 (42.2) | 0.44 | 122 (95.3) | 6 (4.7) | 0.28 |
| Fifth year | 64 (15.8) | 340 (84.2) | 249 (61.6) | 155 (38.4) | 374 (92.6) | 30 (7.4) | |||
| Regular smoking | |||||||||
| Yes | 30 (22.2) | 105 (77.8) | 0.005 | 77 (57.0) | 58 (43.0) | 0.31 | 127 (94.1) | 8 (5.9) | 0.65 |
| No | 49 (12.3) | 348 (87.7) | 246 (62.0) | 151 (38.0) | 369 (92.9) | 28 (7.1) | |||
| Regular alcohol use | |||||||||
| Yes | 26 (19.5) | 107 (80.5) | 0.07 | 79 (59.4) | 54 (40.6) | 0.72 | 127 (95.5) | 6 (4.5) | 0.23 |
| No | 53 (13.3) | 346 (86.7) | 244 (61.2) | 155 (38.8) | 369 (92.5) | 30 (7.5) | |||
Categorical variables reported as frequency (percent), p values obtained Mann-Whitney U and Chi square test test
Discussion
This study investigated fourth and fifth year pharmacy students’ knowledge levels and awareness about CRC risk factors, symptoms, and screening in Turkish context. Unfortunately, the studies focusing on this topic and conducted with pharmacy students are quite limited in number in the related literature [11, 12]. Our study revealed that students’ knowledge about symptoms and screening of colorectal cancer (CRC) was poor, although their awareness of CRC risk factors was at an acceptable level.
Obesity, physical inactivity, a meat-based diet, smoking and alcohol consumption, aging, a medical history of polyp or inflammatory bowel disease, a family history, and type 2 diabetes have all been linked to CRC in cohort and case-control studies. According to studies, nearly 70–75% of CRC cases are caused by modifiable risk factors, making it difficult to provide primary protection without the need to detect them first [16, 17]. As a result, identifying and reducing preventable risk factors for CRC are critical interventions to ensure prevention [18]. As for the CRC risk factors, pharmacy students who participated in our study (85.2%) had a higher level of knowledge than those found in similar studies conducted in other countries: 36.1% poor level of knowledge and 47.4% fair level of knowledge in a study in Jordan context [19]; 59.9% good level of knowledge in another research carried out with Pakistani university students [17]; and 61.7% good level of knowledge in a study conducted with medical students by Ranganath et al. [11].
Awareness about symptoms is critical in the prevention of CRC. The earlier a cancer is diagnosed, the more successful the long-term prognosis is. CRC warning signs include prolonged changes in bowel patterns, rectal bleeding, black stool, cramps, abdominal pain, and unintentional weight loss. In this study, more than half of the students had poor level of knowledge about the symptoms of CRC, while Ranganath et al. reported that preclinical and clinical year students had good level knowledge about the signs and symptoms of CRC; correct response rates being 60.6% and 67.5%, respectively [11]. Another study conducted with university students in Pakistan indicated that 40% of students were knowledgeable about the symptoms of CRC [20].
The World Health Organization (WHO) considers early detection and screening testing to be the gold standard in the combat against CRC. Turkish Ministry of Health recommends that patients begin routine colorectal screening at the age of 50, including extremely sensitive fecal occult blood tests (FOBT) every two years, visual (structural) inspections of the colon and rectum, and colonoscopy every ten years [21]. In this study, the percentage of the participants who correctly answered the age to start CRC screening tests was 11.1%, whereas, in the study conducted by Ranganath et al., the correct response rate was over 50% [11]. In a study conducted by Imran et al., similar to our work, 6.5% of the students answered correctly the question asking the age to start CRC screening [12].
The study found that 38.9% and 5.8% of the participants correctly answered questions about the frequency of repeating FOBT and colonoscopy tests respectively. Knowledge about CRC screening among medical students was inadequate in a study conducted in Saudi Arabia [22]; a similar finding was observed in the current study. This percentage seems disappointing. Pharmacists play a significant role in colorectal cancer prevention. At the primary level, the most important role is related to educating people to prevent cancer and reduce risk factors. It is clear that integrating pharmacist into the health system by increasing their awareness about colorectal cancer through the inclusion of detailed information and specific courses in pharmacy curricula is essential.
Similarly in our study, it has been reported in the literature that knowledge of risk factors is generally higher among students studying in the field of health sciences when compared to knowledge of symptoms and screening [23, 24]. This situation may be due to the curricula’s focus on risk factors, while symptoms and screening are covered less in the curricula. Additionally, limited exposure of students to screening programs during clinical internships and inadequate awareness of screening in the community may also have contributed to this outcome. We recommend placing more emphasis in the curriculum on practices that enhance awareness of screening and symptoms.
Over 50% of the students in our study developed awareness about CRC through the curriculum, whereas the influence of media and other external sources was far less pronounced. Similar to our study, about half of the students in the study by Imran et al. heard about CRC through the curriculum [12]. However, a Malaysian study found that 97% of participants learned about this specific disease from the media [25].
The gender comparison revealed that females were more knowledgeable about CRC risks. Similar to our study, a Malaysian study found that female students had significantly higher level of knowledge about CRC [26]. The disparities in scores between genders on certain questions may be attributed to the greater involvement of females in cancer detection initiatives, particularly as cancer prevention campaigns have predominantly targeted breast and cervical cancers, which exclusively affect females. The knowledge of CRC risk among non-smokers was found to be higher when compared to smokers. The reason for this may be that individuals with a high level of knowledge about cancer risk factors tend to avoid smoking.
“Worrying about a bad result” was identified as the primary barrier to getting a FOBT and colonoscopy. The second barrier to the FOBT was determined as “the test was thought to be embarrassing”, while the second barrier to getting a colonoscopy was reported to be “fear of the procedure being painful”. Low screening rates might be due to insufficient motivation of local governments, failure to develop awareness in educational contexts, and people’s negative attitudes towards the issue in general. The CRC screening program can be improved by teaching healthcare students and workers about relevant tests and their proper use. As future physicians, medical students should develop skills and follow suitable criteria in their early careers. Training individuals on CRC screening procedures and standards can reduce the risk as well as potential future burden to be caused by the disease in the form of increasing number of patients and costs [27].
As one of the most easily accessible healthcare professionals, pharmacists play a crucial role in campaigns to raise awareness about colorectal cancer. When people are informed about the risk factors for colorectal cancer via pharmacies, they might develop awareness about the importance of early diagnosis and national screening programs. Additionally, pharmacists contribute to the dissemination of early diagnosis by informing family physicians or relevant healthcare organizations about their customers with a potential for the disease, especially those in the screening age group. Moreover, advising on risk factors such as promoting healthy lifestyle habits, diet, and smoking and alcohol use is one of the main responsibilities of pharmacists. As reliable health advisors, pharmacists make significant contributions to the prevention and early detection of colorectal cancer through individual counseling and active participation in community awareness campaigns [28].
This study has several limitations. Firstly, it cannot be generalized to national level because it was conducted only at five universities. We recommend future researchers to conduct more multi-centered and large-scale studies to collect more generalizable data. Furthermore, future research might be conducted to explore and compare the effects of various educational interventions on students’ knowledge levels. Secondly, all replies in the current study were self-reported, so the validity of the answers cannot be guaranteed.
Conclusions
This study showed that students had poor level of knowledge about the symptoms and screening of CRC, but their knowledge about the risk of CRC was at an acceptable level. The level of knowledge about CRC risk was statistically and significantly higher in females and non-smoking individuals. There was no statistically significant difference between sociodemographic variables and knowledge about CRC symptoms and screening. “Worrying about a bad result” was identified as the primary barrier to getting a FOBT and colonoscopy. Identifying the risk factors and symptoms of CRC and conducting regular screening tests are vital in preventing CRC. Therefore, students should be equipped with necessary skills and information regarding the issues mentioned. To achieve this purpose, pharmacy faculties should incorporate CRC awareness courses into their curricula. Similarly, different educational interventions, such as social media campaigns, television advertisements, and brochure distribution, should be addressed more frequently. Additionally, Ministry of Health needs to place more emphasis on regular training sessions in universities regarding CRC awareness and early diagnosis.
Supplementary Information
Acknowledgements
None.
Authors’ contributions
Aytaj Aliyeva, Elif Aras-Atik and Kamer Tecen-Yucel, wrote main manuscript and prepared tables. Elif Aras-Atik and Kamer Tecen-Yucel reviewed the manuscript.
Funding
The authors declared that this study received no financial support.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon a reasonable request.
Declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
The study was approved by the Anadolu University Non-Interventional Clinical Trials Ethics Committee (No: E-54380210-050.99-792671). This study was carried out in accordance with the ethical approval obtained. All methods were carried out in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulation. This study was conducted also in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent was obtained from each participant.
Consent for publication
Not applicable (NA).
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Footnotes
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
- 1.Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209–49. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.-WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer 2022. Available at: https://gco.iarc.who.int/media/globocan/factsheets/populations/792-turkiye-fact-sheet.pdf. Accessed 20 Feb 2025.
- 3.Roshandel G, Ghasemi-Kebria F, Malekzadeh R. Colorectal cancer: epidemiology, risk factors, and prevention. Cancers (Basel). 2024;16(8):1530. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.El Zoghbi M, Cummings LC. New era of colorectal cancer screening. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;8(5):252–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Aydogan Gedik S, Metintas S, Onsuz MF. Recognition and participation of colorectal cancer screening in turkiye: a systematic review and meta-analysis study. North Clin Istanb. 2023;10(6):819–29. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.-Simon K. Colorectal cancer development and advances in screening. Clin Interv Aging. 2016;11:967–76. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B, Andrews KS, Brooks D, Bond J, et al. Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adeno- matous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society task force on colorectal cancer, and the American College of Radiology. Gastroenterology. 2008;134(5):1570–95. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Nishiumi S, Kobayashi T, Kawana S, Unno Y, Sakai T, Okamoto K, et al. Investigations in the possibility of early detection of colorectal cancer by gas chromatography/triple-quadrupole mass spectrometry. Oncotarget. 2017;8(10):17115–26. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Alduraywish SA, Altamimi LA, Almajed AA, Kokandi BA, Alqahtani RS, Alghaihb SG, et al. Barriers of colorectal cancer screening test among adults in the Saudi population: a cross-sectional study. Prev Med Rep. 2020;20:101235. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.-Raosoft Inc. (2004) RaoSoft® sample size calculator. http://www.raosoft.com/samplesize.html. Accessed 01 Jan 2025.
- 11.Ranganath R, Al-maamari LSS, Al-Saidi AAR, Al-Dujaili AHB, Al-Fatih Mahmood M. Knowledge and awareness of colorectal cancer among university students in Oman. J Health Sci Med Res. 2022;40(2):215–22. [Google Scholar]
- 12.Imran M, Sayedalamin Z, Alsulami SS, Atta M, Baig M. Knowledge and awareness of colorectal cancer among undergraduate students at King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: a survey-based study. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2016;17(5):2479–83. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.-Orok E, Okaramee C, Egboro B, et al. Pharmacy students’ perception and knowledge of chat-based artificial intelligence tools at a Nigerian university. BMC Med Educ. 2024;24(1):1237. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Ssewante N, Wekha G, Iradukunda A, et al. Basic life support, a necessary inclusion in the medical curriculum: a cross-sectional survey of knowledge and attitude in Uganda. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22(1):140. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Albayrak A, Cengiz KN. Assessment of breast cancer awareness among female pharmacy students at a university in Turkey. BMC Med Educ. 2024;24(1):363. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Pan Z, Huang J, Huang M, Yao Z, Huang J, Chen J, et al. Risk factors for early-onset colorectal cancer: a largescale Chinese cohort study. J Natl Cancer Cent. 2023;3(1):28–34. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.-Ramadan M. Assessing the contribution of nine preventable risk factors attributed to the burden of early onset colorectal cancer in Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries. Prev Med Rep. 2023;35(102389):1–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.-Tufail M, Wu C, Hussain M. Dietary, addictive and habitual factors, and risk of colorectal cancer. Nutrition. 2024;120(112334):1–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Mhaidat NM, Al-husein BA, Alzoubi KH, Hatamleh DI, Khader Y, Matalqah S, et al. Knowledge and awareness of colorectal cancer early warning signs and risk factors among university students in Jordan. J Cancer Educ. 2018;33:448–56. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.-Hussain I, Majeed A, Rasool MF, et al. Knowledge, attitude, preventive practices and perceived barriers to screening about colorectal cancer among university students of newly merged district, Pakistan–A cross-sectional study. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2021;27:359–67. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.-Health Statistics Yearbook. 2023, http://hsgm.saglik.gov.tr. Accessed 6 May 2025.
- 22.Althobaiti A, Jradi H. Knowledge, attitude, and perceived barriers regarding colorectal cancer screening practices and risk factors among medical students in Saudi Arabia. BMC Med Educ. 2019. 10.1186/s12909-019-1857-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.-Smith RA, et al. Cancer screening in the united States. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69(3):184–210. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.-Özkan S, et al. Sağlık bilimleri öğrencilerinde Kolorektal Kanser farkındalığı. Turk J Public Health. 2018;16(2):85–96. [Google Scholar]
- 25.-Hazreen AM, Mayint MSİ, Farizah H, Rashid MA, Chai CC, Dymna VK, et al. An evaluation of information dissemination during the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak among selected rural communities in Kuala. Kangsar Med J Malaysia. 2025;60:180–7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.-Loo JL, Woo WY, Chin MW, Yam HR. Cancer awareness of a sample of Malaysian undergraduate students. Am J Cancer Prev. 2013;1:9–13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Scheid DC, Hamm RM, Ramakrishnan K, McCarthy LH, Mold JW. Improving colorectal cancer screening in family medicine: an Oklahoma physicians resource/research network (OKPRN) study. J Am Board Fam Med. 2013;26:498–507. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Toklu HZ, Hussain A. The changing face of pharmacy practice and the need for a new model of pharmacy education. J Young Pharm. 2013;5(2):38–40. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Data Availability Statement
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon a reasonable request.