Literature DB >> 16371251

Cancer screening: the importance of outcome measures.

Shabbir M H Alibhai1.   

Abstract

Cancer screening is attracting greater attention as a growing number of studies and practice guidelines exhort physicians to screen for an increasing number of malignancies. Central to the evaluation of these studies is both the quality of the evidence and the impact of screening upon clinically relevant outcomes. Although much has been written about the optimal study design for screening studies, surprisingly little has been written about evaluating specific outcome measures employed in such studies. This paper reviews the strengths and limitations of common outcomes employed in cancer screening studies. The relationship between study design and outcome measure is explored. Three key biases (lead-time, length-time, and volunteer) associated with screening studies and methods to minimize them are also reviewed. Potential harms associated with screening are outlined. Although disease-specific mortality may be the most robust and relevant traditional outcome measure, increasing attention is being paid to composite health outcome measures for older populations, including quality of life and cost-based measures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16371251     DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2005.08.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Rev Oncol Hematol        ISSN: 1040-8428            Impact factor:   6.312


  6 in total

Review 1.  Understanding and communicating risk: Measures of outcome and the magnitude of benefits and harms.

Authors:  Neil R Bell; James A Dickinson; Roland Grad; Harminder Singh; Danielle Kasperavicius; Brett D Thombs
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 3.275

2. 

Authors:  Neil R Bell; James A Dickinson; Roland Grad; Harminder Singh; Danielle Kasperavicius; Brett D Thombs
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 3.275

3.  Response.

Authors:  Danielle Kasperavicius; Neil R Bell; Roland Grad; James A Dickinson; Ainsley Elizabeth Moore; Harminder Singh; Brett D Thombs; Brenda J Wilson
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 3.275

4.  X-ray screening seems to reduce gastric cancer mortality by half in a community-controlled trial in Costa Rica.

Authors:  L Rosero-Bixby; R Sierra
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2007-10-02       Impact factor: 7.640

5.  Early impact and performance characteristics of an established anal dysplasia screening program: program evaluation considerations.

Authors:  Christopher Mathews; Joseph Caperna; Edward R Cachay; Bard Cosman
Journal:  Open AIDS J       Date:  2007-11-29

Review 6.  Quantification of harms in cancer screening trials: literature review.

Authors:  Bruno Heleno; Maria F Thomsen; David S Rodrigues; Karsten J Jørgensen; John Brodersen
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2013-09-16
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.