Literature DB >> 17960355

[Screening from an epidemiologic perspective].

N Becker1.   

Abstract

The concept of screening is that detection of early disease may permit treatment at a more tractable stage and thus improve prospects for survival and prevention of death from the disease. The principle is so suggestive that the issue of screening appears focused on the determination of appropriate imaging tools or biomarkers and translating them into the health care system as rapidly as possible. However, the application of tests to identify precursors or early signs of disease in a largely unaffected population raises problems which have to be well understood to offer effective high-level screening. The present article provides an overview of the basic obstacles and how to cope with them. It turns out that quality assurance of service screening has to be considered not as optional but as a condition sine qua non.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 17960355     DOI: 10.1007/s00117-007-1556-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiologe        ISSN: 0033-832X            Impact factor:   0.635


  11 in total

1.  Medicine. Communicating statistical information.

Authors:  U Hoffrage; S Lindsey; R Hertwig; G Gigerenzer
Journal:  Science       Date:  2000-12-22       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Overdiagnosis: An underrecognized cause of confusion and harm in cancer screening.

Authors:  W C Black
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2000-08-16       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 3.  Ovarian cancer screening: are we making any progress?

Authors:  P J Paley
Journal:  Curr Opin Oncol       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 3.645

4.  [Screening from the epidemiological viewpoint].

Authors:  N Becker
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 0.635

5.  Natural history of dysplasia of the uterine cervix.

Authors:  P Holowaty; A B Miller; T Rohan; T To
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1999-02-03       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  Organised vs. spontaneous Pap-smear screening for cervical cancer: A case-control study.

Authors:  P Nieminen; M Kallio; A Anttila; M Hakama
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  1999-09-24       Impact factor: 7.396

7.  Neuroblastoma screening at one year of age.

Authors:  Freimut H Schilling; Claudia Spix; Frank Berthold; Rudolf Erttmann; Natalja Fehse; Barbara Hero; Gisela Klein; Johannes Sander; Kerstin Schwarz; Joern Treuner; Ulrich Zorn; Joerg Michaelis
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2002-04-04       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Predicting the cumulative risk of false-positive mammograms.

Authors:  C L Christiansen; F Wang; M B Barton; W Kreuter; J G Elmore; A E Gelfand; S W Fletcher
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2000-10-18       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 9.  Increases in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast in relation to mammography: a dilemma.

Authors:  V L Ernster; J Barclay
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  1997

10.  [Information on mammography screening--from deception to insight].

Authors:  I Mühlhauser; B Höldke
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 0.635

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  [The medical management of high risk individuals. Experiences with persons exposed to chronic internal irradiation].

Authors:  G van Kaick; S Delorme
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 0.635

Review 2.  [Prerequisites for a successful lung cancer screening program].

Authors:  N Becker; S Delorme
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 0.635

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.