Literature DB >> 22972812

Communicating the balance sheet in breast cancer screening.

Livia Giordano1, Carla Cogo, Julietta Patnick, Eugenio Paci.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Despite the difficulties, there is a moral responsibility to provide the public with the best estimates of benefits and harms of breast cancer screening.
METHODS: In this paper we review the issues in communication of benefits and harms of medical interventions and discuss these in terms of the principles of the balance sheet proposed in this supplement.
RESULTS: The balance sheet can be seen as a tool to convey estimates based on the best available evidence and addressed to a readership wider than just potential screening participants. It reflects a re-assessment of screening efficacy, showing again that screening is effective and brings more benefits than harms. It can be viewed as an opportunity to re-affirm some basic principles of good evidence-based communication. Further research is needed to improve communication strategy, to assess the impact of this communication on women's awareness and to evaluate its utility in the informed decision-making process.
CONCLUSION: The balance sheet could be a starting point for a broader vision of informed decision-making in screening, which should also recognize the role played by 'non-numerical' factors on women's choice of participating in breast cancer screening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22972812     DOI: 10.1258/jms.2012.012084

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Screen        ISSN: 0969-1413            Impact factor:   2.136


  4 in total

Review 1.  The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review.

Authors:  M G Marmot; D G Altman; D A Cameron; J A Dewar; S G Thompson; M Wilcox
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2013-06-06       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 2.  Changes in U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations: effect on mammography screening in Olmsted County, MN 2004-2013.

Authors:  Lila J Finney Rutten; Jon O Ebbert; Debra J Jacobson; Linda B Squiers; Chun Fan; Carmen Radecki Breitkopf; Véronique L Roger; Jennifer L St Sauver
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2014-10-28       Impact factor: 4.018

3.  Screening: The information individuals need to support their decision: per protocol analysis is better than intention-to-treat analysis at quantifying potential benefits and harms of screening.

Authors:  Paolo Giorgi Rossi
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2014-03-28       Impact factor: 2.652

4.  Women's participation in breast cancer screening in France--an ethical approach.

Authors:  Grégoire Moutel; Nathalie Duchange; Sylviane Darquy; Sandrine de Montgolfier; Frédérique Papin-Lefebvre; Odile Jullian; Jérôme Viguier; Hélène Sancho-Garnier
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2014-08-16       Impact factor: 2.652

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.