Table 2. Differences in FIT usage within 1 year in the intervention subgroups after receiving an invitation with or without a reminder.
| Group A (Comparison of FIT usage without/with reminder) | Group B (Comparison of FIT usage without/with reminder) | |||||||||
| A2 (N=2936) | A1 (N=2914) | Difference in % points | p-value*2A1 vs. A2 | Relative FIT use [95% CI] | B2 (N=2933) | B1 (N=2911) | Difference in % points | p-value*2B1 vs. B2 | Relative FIT use [95% CI] | |
| Total FIT usage (%)*1 | 763 (26.0) | 975 (33.5) | 7.5 | < 0.0001 | 1.3 [1.2; 1.4] | 687 (23.4) | 929 (31.9) | 8.5 | <0.0001 | 1.4 [1.3; 1.5] |
| Men (%)*3 | 334 (21.7) | 445 (28.7) | 7.0 | < 0.0001 | 1.3 [1.2; 1.5] | 312 (19.7) | 435 (27.3) | 7.6 | <0.0001 | 1.4 [1.2; 1.6] |
| Women (%)*3 | 414 (29.6) | 518 (37.9) | 8.3 | < 0.0001 | 1.3 [1.2; 1.4] | 370 (27.4) | 491 (37.2) | 9.8 | <0.0001 | 1.4 [1.2; 1.5] |
A2: Invitation + FIT without reminder; A1: invitation + FIT with reminder; B2: invitation + request option without reminder; B1: invitation + request option with reminder;
*1 Total FIT usage = FITs used in routine practice per subgroup plus returned “intervention” FITs per subgroup
*2 Contingency table analysis using two-sided chi-squared test
*3 Number of men and women per subgroup: 1548 men, 1366 women (A1); 1538 men, 1398 women (A2); 1592 men, 1319 women (B1); 1584 men, 1349 women (B2). Missing gender ‧information in returned FITs: n=27 (A) and n=8 (B)
FIT: Fecal immunological test; CI: confidence interval