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
TL;DR: Although the A-TAC is principally intended for epidemiological research and general investigations, the instrument may be useful as a tool to collect information in clinical practice as well, and different cut-off levels for screening versus identifying proxies for clinical diagnoses are warranted.
Abstract: Reliable, valid, and easy-to-administer instruments to identify possible caseness and to provide proxies for clinical diagnoses are needed in epidemiological research on child and adolescent mental health. The aim of this study is to provide further validity data for a parent telephone interview focused on Autism - Tics, Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (AD/HD), and other Comorbidities (A-TAC), for which reliability and preliminary validation data have been previously reported. Parents of 91 children clinically diagnosed at a specialized Child Neuropsychiatric Clinic, 366 control children and 319 children for whom clinical diagnoses had been previously assigned were interviewed by the A-TAC over the phone. Interviewers were blind to clinical information. Different scores from the A-TAC were compared to the diagnostic outcome. Areas under ROC curves for interview scores as predictors of clinical diagnoses were around 0.95 for most disorders, including autism spectrum disorders (ASDs), attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (AD/HD), tic disorders, developmental coordination disorders (DCD) and learning disorders, indicating excellent screening properties. Screening cut-off scores with sensitivities above 0.90 (0.95 for ASD and AD/HD) were established for most conditions, as well as cut-off scores to identify proxies to clinical diagnoses with specificities above 0.90 (0.95 for ASD and AD/HD). The previously reported validity of the A-TAC was supported by this larger replication study using broader scales from the A-TAC-items and a larger number of diagnostic categories. Short versions of algorithms worked as well as larger. Different cut-off levels for screening versus identifying proxies for clinical diagnoses are warranted. Data on the validity for mood problems and oppositional defiant/conduct problems are still lacking. Although the A-TAC is principally intended for epidemiological research and general investigations, the instrument may be useful as a tool to collect information in clinical practice as well.

444 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The new American Cancer Society colorectal cancer screening guidelines are summarized and a clarification in the language of the 2013 lung cancer screening guideline is included.
Abstract: Each year, the American Cancer Society publishes a summary of its guidelines for early cancer detection, data and trends in cancer screening rates from the National Health Interview Survey, and select issues related to cancer screening. In this 2018 update, we also summarize the new American Cancer Society colorectal cancer screening guideline and include a clarification in the language of the 2013 lung cancer screening guideline. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:297-316. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

443 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Digital mammography performed significantly better than film for pre- and perimenopausal women younger than 50 years with dense breasts, but film tended nonsignificantly to perform better for women aged 65 years or older with fatty breasts.
Abstract: Purpose: To retrospectively compare the accuracy of digital versus film mammography in population subgroups of the Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST) defined by combinations of age, menopausal status, and breast density, by using either biopsy results or follow-up information as the reference standard. Materials and Methods: DMIST included women who underwent both digital and film screening mammography. Institutional review board approval at all participating sites and informed consent from all participating women in compliance with HIPAA was obtained for DMIST and this retrospective analysis. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) for each modality were compared within each subgroup evaluated (age < 50 vs 50–64 vs ≥ 65 years, dense vs nondense breasts at mammography, and pre- or perimenopausal vs postmenopausal status for the two younger age cohorts [10 new subgroups in toto]) while controlling for multiple comparisons (P < .002 indicated a significant difference...

441 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The new ACSM exercise preparticipation health screening recommendations reduce possible unnecessary barriers to adopting and maintaining a regular exercise program, a lifestyle of habitual physical activity, or both, and thereby emphasize the important public health message that regular physical activity is important for all individuals.
Abstract: The purpose of the American College of Sports Medicine's (ACSM) exercise preparticipation health screening process is to identify individuals who may be at elevated risk for exercise-related sudden cardiac death and/or acute myocardial infarction. Recent studies have suggested that using the current ACSM exercise preparticipation health screening guidelines can result in excessive physician referrals, possibly creating a barrier to exercise participation. In addition, there is considerable evidence that exercise is safe for most people and has many associated health and fitness benefits; exercise-related cardiovascular events are often preceded by warning signs/symptoms; and the cardiovascular risks associated with exercise lessen as individuals become more physically active/fit. Consequently, a scientific roundtable was convened by the ACSM in June 2014 to evaluate the current exercise preparticipation health screening recommendations. The roundtable proposed a new evidence-informed model for exercise preparticipation health screening on the basis of three factors: 1) the individual's current level of physical activity, 2) presence of signs or symptoms and/or known cardiovascular, metabolic, or renal disease, and 3) desired exercise intensity, as these variables have been identified as risk modulators of exercise-related cardiovascular events. Identifying cardiovascular disease risk factors remains an important objective of overall disease prevention and management, but risk factor profiling is no longer included in the exercise preparticipation health screening process. The new ACSM exercise preparticipation health screening recommendations reduce possible unnecessary barriers to adopting and maintaining a regular exercise program, a lifestyle of habitual physical activity, or both, and thereby emphasize the important public health message that regular physical activity is important for all individuals.

441 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
L. von Karsa1, Julietta Patnick2, Julietta Patnick3, Nereo Segnan1, Wendy Atkin4, Stephen P Halloran5, Stephen P Halloran6, Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar7, N. Malila, Silvia Minozzi, Sue Moss, Philip Quirke8, Robert Steele9, Michael Vieth, Lars Aabakken10, Lutz Altenhofen, R. Ancelle-Park, N. Antoljak11, A. Anttila, Paola Armaroli, S. Arrossi, Joan Austoker2, Rita Banzi12, Cristina Bellisario, J. Blom13, Hermann Brenner14, Michael Bretthauer15, M. Camargo Cancela1, Guido Costamagna, Jack Cuzick16, M. Dai17, Jill Daniel1, Jill Daniel18, Evelien Dekker19, N. Delicata, S. Ducarroz1, H. Erfkamp20, J. A. Espinàs, J. Faivre21, L. Faulds Wood, Anath Flugelman, S. Frkovic-Grazio22, Berta M. Geller23, Livia Giordano, Grazia Grazzini, Jane Green2, C. Hamashima24, C. Herrmann1, Paul Hewitson2, Geir Hoff, Holten Iw, R. Jover, Michal F. Kaminski, E. J. Kuipers7, Juozas Kurtinaitis, René Lambert1, Guy Launoy25, W. Lee26, R. Leicester27, Marcis Leja28, David A. Lieberman29, T Lignini1, Eric Lucas1, Elsebeth Lynge30, S. Mádai, J. Marinho, J. Maučec Zakotnik, G. Minoli, C. Monk31, António Pedro Delgado Morais, Richard Muwonge1, Marion R. Nadel32, L. Neamtiu, M. Peris Tuser, Michael Pignone33, Christian Pox34, M. Primic-Zakelj35, J. Psaila, Linda Rabeneck36, David F. Ransohoff33, M. Rasmussen30, Jaroslaw Regula, J. Ren1, Gad Rennert, J. F. Rey, Robert H. Riddell37, Mauro Risio, Vitor Rodrigues38, H. Saito24, Catherine Sauvaget1, Astrid Scharpantgen, Wolff Schmiegel34, Carlo Senore, Maqsood Siddiqi, D. Sighoko1, D. Sighoko39, Richard D. Smith18, Steve Smith40, Stepan Suchanek41, Eero Suonio1, W. Tong17, Sven Törnberg, E. Van Cutsem42, Luca Vignatelli, P. Villain2, Lydia Voti43, Lydia Voti1, Hidemi Watanabe44, Joanna Watson2, Sidney J. Winawer45, G. Young46, V. Zaksas, Marco Zappa, Roland Valori 
TL;DR: An overview of the principles, recommendations and standards in the guidelines for quality assurance in CRC screening and diagnosis are presented in journal format in an open-access Supplement of Endoscopy.
Abstract: Population-based screening for early detection and treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC) and precursor lesions, using evidence-based methods, can be effective in populations with a significant burden of the disease provided the services are of high quality. Multidisciplinary, evidence-based guidelines for quality assurance in CRC screening and diagnosis have been developed by experts in a project co-financed by the European Union. The 450-page guidelines were published in book format by the European Commission in 2010. They include 10 chapters and over 250 recommendations, individually graded according to the strength of the recommendation and the supporting evidence. Adoption of the recommendations can improve and maintain the quality and effectiveness of an entire screening process, including identification and invitation of the target population, diagnosis and management of the disease and appropriate surveillance in people with detected lesions. To make the principles, recommendations and standards in the guidelines known to a wider professional and scientific community and to facilitate their use in the scientific literature, the original content is presented in journal format in an open-access Supplement of Endoscopy. The editors have prepared the present overview to inform readers of the comprehensive scope and content of the guidelines.

440 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