scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Topic

Mass screening

About: Mass screening is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 34508 publications have been published within this topic receiving 1365148 citations.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
14 Sep 2010-BMJ
TL;DR: The existing evidence from randomised controlled trials does not support the routine use of screening for prostate cancer with prostate specific antigen with or without digital rectal examination.
Abstract: Objective To examine the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for prostate cancer. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Data sources Electronic databases including Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, abstract proceedings, and reference lists up to July 2010. Review methods Included studies were randomised controlled trials comparing screening by prostate specific antigen with or without digital rectal examination versus no screening. Data abstraction and assessment of methodological quality with the GRADE approach was assessed by two independent reviewers and verified by the primary investigator. Mantel-Haenszel and inverse variance estimates were calculated and pooled under a random effects model expressing data as relative risks and 95% confidence intervals. Results Six randomised controlled trials with a total of 387 286 participants that met inclusion criteria were analysed. Screening was associated with an increased probability of receiving a diagnosis of prostate cancer (relative risk 1.46, 95% confidence interval 1.21 to 1.77; P Conclusions The existing evidence from randomised controlled trials does not support the routine use of screening for prostate cancer with prostate specific antigen with or without digital rectal examination.

326 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: There is strong evidence from three trials that personalised risk estimates incorporated within communication interventions for screening programmes enhance informed choices, although with heterogeneous results.
Abstract: Background. There is a trend towards greater patient involvement in healthcare decisions. Although screening is usually perceived as good for the health of the population, there are risks associated with the tests involved. Achieving both adequate involvement of consumers and informed decision making are now seen as important goals for screening programmes. Personalised risk estimates have been shown to be effective methods of risk communication. Objectives. To assess the effects of personalised risk communication on informed decision making by individuals taking screening tests. We also assess individual components that constitute informed decisions. Search methods. Two authors searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2012), MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP), CINAHL (EbscoHOST) and PsycINFO (OvidSP) without language restrictions. We searched from 2006 to March 2012. The date ranges for the previous searches were from 1989 to December 2005 for PsycINFO and from 1985 to December 2005 for other databases. For the original version of this review, we also searched CancerLit and Science Citation Index (March 2001). We also reviewed the reference lists and conducted citation searches of included studies and other systematic reviews in the field, to identify any studies missed during the initial search. Selection criteria. Randomised controlled trials incorporating an intervention with a 'personalised risk communication element’ for individuals undergoing screening procedures, and reporting measures of informed decisions and also cognitive, affective, or behavioural outcomes addressing the decision by such individuals, of whether or not to undergo screening. Data collection and analysis. Two authors independently assessed each included trial for risk of bias, and extracted data. We extracted data about the nature and setting of interventions, and relevant outcome data. We used standard statistical methods to combine data using RevMan version 5, including analysis according to different levels of detail of personalised risk communication, different conditions for screening, and studies based only on high-risk participants rather than people at 'average’ risk. Main results. We included 41 studies involving 28,700 people. Nineteen new studies were identified in this update, adding to the 22 studies included in the previous two iterations of the review. Three studies measured informed decision with regard to the uptake of screening following personalised risk communication as a part of their intervention. All of these three studies were at low risk of bias and there was strong evidence that the interventions enhanced informed decision making, although with heterogeneous results. Overall 45.2% (592/1309) of participants who received personalised risk information made informed choices, compared to 20.2% (229/1135) of participants who received generic risk information. The overall odds ratios (ORs) for informed decision were 4.48 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.62 to 5.53 for fixed effect) and 3.65 (95% CI 2.13 to 6.23 for random effects). Nine studies measured increase in knowledge, using different scales. All of these studies showed an increase in knowledge with personalised risk communication. In three studies the interventions showed a trend towards more accurate risk perception, but the evidence was of poor quality. Four out of six studies reported non-significant changes in anxiety following personalised risk communication to the participants. Overall there was a small non-significant decrease in the anxiety scores. Most studies (32/41) measured the uptake of screening tests following interventions. Our results (OR 1.15 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.29)) constitute low quality evidence, consistent with a small effect, that personalised risk communication in which a risk score was provided (6 studies) or the participants were given their categorised risk (6 studies), increases uptake of screening tests. Authors' conclusions. There is strong evidence from three trials that personalised risk estimates incorporated within communication interventions for screening programmes enhance informed choices. However the evidence for increasing the uptake of such screening tests with similar interventions is weak, and it is not clear if this increase is associated with informed choices. Studies included a diverse range of screening programmes. Therefore, data from this review do not allow us to draw conclusions about the best interventions to deliver personalised risk communication for enhancing informed decisions. The results are dominated by findings from the topic area of mammography and colorectal cancer. Caution is therefore required in generalising from these results, and particularly for clinical topics other than mammography and colorectal cancer screening.

326 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The epidemiological and biological understanding of the natural history of HPV infection is examined, with an eye toward using these studies to guide the implementation of cervical cancer prevention strategies.
Abstract: The discovery that certain high-risk strains of human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) cause nearly 100% of invasive cervical cancer has spurred a revolution in cervical cancer prevention by promoting the development of viral vaccines. Although the efficacy of these vaccines has already been demonstrated, a complete understanding of viral latency and natural immunity is lacking, and solving these mysteries could help guide policies of cervical cancer screening and vaccine use. Here, we examine the epidemiological and biological understanding of the natural history of HPV infection, with an eye toward using these studies to guide the implementation of cervical cancer prevention strategies.

325 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a screening survey for cardiorespiratory disease and diabetes among 18,403 male Civil Servants aged 40-64 years, representing a 77% response of those eligible.

325 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: To assess the construct validity of a telephone‐administered version of the Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE), a questionnaire is administered to students in order to assess the validity of the questionnaire itself.
Abstract: Objective To assess the construct validity of a telephone-administered version of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). Design Validity testing by comparing a telephone version of the MMSE administered first to a face-to-face evaluation done several days later. Setting Outpatient geriatric assessment center. Subjects 100 of 175 consecutive referrals. Main Outcome Measures MMSE and a brief neuropsychological screening test (BNPS) face-to-face and a telephone version of the MMSE as part of the Adult Lifestyles and Function Interview (ALFI-MMSE). Results Test scores of the two MMSE versions correlated strongly for all subjects (Pearson's r = 0.85, P = 0.001) and remained significant for the cognitively intact (P = 0.02) and questionably (P = 0.002), mildly (P = 0.0001), and moderately (P = 0.003) demented. Comparison of the two versions' equivalent 22 items revealed no significant difference for scores of all subjects (P = 0.07) but with a trend toward higher scores in the original version. Diminished hearing, reported either by the subject (P = 0.003) or by the collateral source (P = 0.02) was associated with lower scores on the telephone version. Five individual test items were biased by the route of test administration. Sensitivity and specificity relative to the BNPS were 67% and 100% for the ALFI-MMSE and 68% and 100% for the MMSE, respectively. Conclusion The scores on the ALFI-MMSE correlated strongly with the scores of the original version given face-to-face in subjects undergoing geriatric assessment. The results indicate that the ALFI-MMSE could be a useful and economical tool to screen for cognitive impairment.

324 citations


Network Information
Related Topics (5)
Odds ratio
68.7K papers, 3M citations
90% related
Public health
158.3K papers, 3.9M citations
89% related
Risk factor
91.9K papers, 5.7M citations
89% related
Randomized controlled trial
119.8K papers, 4.8M citations
87% related
Health care
342.1K papers, 7.2M citations
86% related
Performance
Metrics
No. of papers in the topic in previous years
YearPapers
20223
2021736
2020871
2019821
20181,027
20171,365