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 published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
TL;DR: It is essential that the medical profession play a central role in critically evaluating the evidence related to drugs, devices, and procedures for the detection, management, or prevention of disease.
Abstract: It is essential that the medical profession play a central role in critically evaluating the evidence related to drugs, devices, and procedures for the detection, management, or prevention of disease. Properly applied, rigorous, expert analysis of the available data documenting absolute and relative benefits and risks of these therapies and procedures can improve the effectiveness of care, optimize patient outcomes, and favorably affect the cost of care by focusing resources on the most effective strategies. One important use of such data is the production of clinical practice guidelines that, in turn, can provide a foundation for a variety of other applications, such as performance measures, appropriate use criteria, clinical decision support tools, and quality improvement tools.
The American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF) and the American Heart Association (AHA) have jointly engaged in the production of guidelines in the area of cardiovascular disease since 1980. The ACCF/AHA Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Task Force) is charged with developing, updating, and revising practice guidelines for cardiovascular diseases and procedures, and the Task Force directs and oversees this effort. Writing committees are charged with assessing the evidence as an independent group of authors to develop, update, or revise recommendations for clinical practice.
Experts in the subject under consideration have been selected from both organizations to examine subject-specific data and write guidelines in partnership with representatives from other medical practitioner and specialty groups. Writing committees are specifically charged to perform a formal literature review; weigh the strength of evidence for or against particular tests, treatments, or procedures; and include estimates of expected health outcomes where data exist. Patient-specific modifiers, comorbidities, and issues of patient preference that may influence the choice of tests or therapies are considered. When available, information from studies on cost is considered, but data on efficacy and clinical outcomes constitute …
1,930 citations
TL;DR: A new method is described for rapid and economical screening of large numbers of hospital nursery infants for elevation in blood phenylalanine associated with phenylketonuria, and results indicate that a very low rate of "false-positives" will be encountered during screening of the 10,000 or more infants that may be necessary to detect a case of phenyl ketonuria.
Abstract: A new method is described for rapid and economical screening of large numbers of hospital nursery infants for elevation in blood phenylalanine associated with phenylketonuria. Results are presented for 682 infants, 96% of whom were 4 days of age. None of the blood phenylalanine values were found to be as high as 4 mg/100 ml, and only 8% were above 2 mg/100 ml. These values appear to be in agreement with values obtained by other methods, and indicate that a very low rate of "false-positives" will be encountered during screening of the 10,000 or more infants that may be necessary to detect a case of phenylketonuria. It is recommended that any result of 6 mg/100 ml or above be considered positive, and require confirmation by phenylalanine determination of a second blood specimen.
1,920 citations
TL;DR: This guideline report presents the panel’s recommendations with respect to screening and surveillance in people at average risk for CRC and those at increased risk because of a family history of CRC or genetic syndromes or a personal history of adenomatous polyps, inflammatory bowel disease, or curative-intent resection of CRC.
1,862 citations
TL;DR: The STOP questionnaire is a concise and easy-to-use screening tool for OSA that has been developed and validated in surgical patients at preoperative clinics and had a high sensitivity, especially for patients with moderate to severe OSA.
Abstract: Background Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a major risk factor for perioperative adverse events. However, no screening tool for OSA has been validated in surgical patients. This study was conducted to develop and validate a concise and easy-to-use questionnaire for OSA screening in surgical patients. Methods After hospital ethics approval, preoperative patients aged 18 yr or older and without previously diagnosed OSA were recruited. After a factor analysis, reliability check, and pilot study; four yes/no questions were used to develop this screening tool. The four questions were respectively related to snoring, tiredness during daytime, observed apnea, and high blood pressure (STOP). For validation, the score from the STOP questionnaire was evaluated versus the apnea-hypopnea index from monitored polysomnography. Results The STOP questionnaire was given to 2,467 patients, 27.5% classified as being at high risk of OSA. Two hundred eleven patients underwent polysomnography, 34 for the pilot test and 177 for validation. In the validation group, the apnea-hypopnea index was 20 +/- 6. The sensitivities of the STOP questionnaire with apnea-hypopnea index greater than 5, greater than 15, and greater than 30 as cutoffs were 65.6, 74.3, and 79.5%, respectively. When incorporating body mass index, age, neck circumference, and gender into the STOP questionnaire, sensitivities were increased to 83.6, 92.9, and 100% with the same apnea-hypopnea index cutoffs. Conclusions The STOP questionnaire is a concise and easy-to-use screening tool for OSA. It has been developed and validated in surgical patients at preoperative clinics. Combined with body mass index, age, neck size, and gender, it had a high sensitivity, especially for patients with moderate to severe OSA.
1,829 citations
Journal Article•
TL;DR: The revised wording of the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire has apparently had the intended effect of reducing positive responses, particularly to the question regarding an elevation of blood pressure.
Abstract: The original Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q) offers a safe preliminary screening of candidates for exercise testing and prescription, but it screens out what seems an excessive proportion of apparently healthy older adults. To reduce unnecessary exclusions, an expert committee established by Fitness Canada has now revised the questionnaire wording. The present study compares responses to the original and the revised PAR-Q questionnaire in 399 men and women attending 40 accredited fitness testing centres across Canada. The number of subjects screened out by the revised test decreased significantly (p < .05), from 68 to 48 of the 399 subjects. The change reflects in part the inclusion of individuals who had made an erroneous positive response to the original question regarding high blood pressure. There is no simple gold standard to provide an objective evaluation of the sensitivity and specificity of either questionnaire format, but the revised wording has apparently had the intended effect of reducing positive responses, particularly to the question regarding an elevation of blood pressure.
1,824 citations