. 2022 Feb 15;22:204. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-07576-4

Table 2.

Participating Practice Characteristics Overall and by Cost of FIT (Known, Unknown)

	Overall Respondents		Known Cost		Unknown Cost
	N	%	N	%	N	%	p*
Total N	84	(100)	40	(100)	44	(100)
Practice size
Solo/partnership (1, 2)	10	(12)	8	(20)	2	(5)	0.031^a
Small to medium (3–10)	51	(61)	25	(63)	26	(59)
Large (> 10)	23	(27)	7	(18)	16	(36)
Geographic location
Frontier	10	(12)	6	(15)	4	(9)	0.61^a
Rural	41	(49)	20	(50)	21	(48)
Urban	33	(39)	14	(35)	19	(43)
Source for FIT/FOBT kits
Laboratory	47	(57)	17	(43)	30	(71)	0.001^a
Vendor	25	(30)	20	(50)	5	(12)
Health System	10	(12)	3	(8)	7	(17)
Practice Characteristics
Number of patient visits per week, mean (min-max)	427	(32–5250)	314	(32–1200)	554	(105–5250)	0.07^b
Percent of patient panel covered by Medicaid/CHIP/OHP, mean (min-max)	30	(2–85)	30	(2–75)	30	(5–85)	0.93^b
Current CRC screening rate, mean (min-max)	59	(10–97)	56	(23–85)	62	(10–97)	0.14^b
Number of QI projects related to CRC screening in past 12 months, mean (min-max)	1	(0–6)	1	(0–3)	1	(0–6)	0.86^b
CRC improvement as priority in year ahead (1 no priority, 10 highest priority), mean (min-max)	8	(1–10)	8	(1–10)	8	(5–10)	0.74^b
Preferred CRC screening modality
FIT/FOBT	7	(8)	3	(8)	4	(9)	0.96^a
Colonoscopy	10	(12)	5	(13)	5	(11)
Both (colonoscopy & FIT/FOBT)	67	(80)	32	(80)	35	(80)
Preference for FIT/FOBT (1 = hate, 10 = love), mean (min-max)	7	(1–10)	7	(1–10)	7	(3–10)	0.18^b

^*p value from (a) Pearson’s chi-squared test or (b) Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Lower p values provide some evidence that the distributions of the characteristic in question differ between the “known” and “unknown” cost groups