Literature DB >> 536674

Selective screening: theory and practice based on high-risk groups of cervical cancer.

M Hakama, E Pukkala, P Saastamoinen.   

Abstract

Using data taken from the organised mass screening system in Finland, risk indicators of cervical cancer were identified in order to define a high-risk group which could then be used for selective screening of cervical cancer. Single risk factors classified at best 39% of the cases into a high-risk group of 8%. A combination of risk factors by different statistical methods was applied, but the results were essentially the same. In order to find a high-risk group small enough to yield a reduction in costs, the number of cases originating from the low-risk group was increased. Theoretical calculations showed that for selective screening to be effective, the risk of disease in the high-risk group relative to that in the low-risk group must be greater than that implied by current knowledge of cervical cancer epidemiology. It was concluded that selective screening has only a limited applicability.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1979        PMID: 536674      PMCID: PMC1051967          DOI: 10.1136/jech.33.4.257

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health        ISSN: 0143-005X            Impact factor:   3.710


  7 in total

1.  Mass screenings for cervical cancer in Finland 1963-71. Organization, extent, and epidemiological implications.

Authors:  M Hakama; U Joutsenlahti; A Virtanen; U Räsänen-Virtanen
Journal:  Ann Clin Res       Date:  1975-04

2.  Reasoning foundations of medical diagnosis; symbolic logic, probability, and value theory aid our understanding of how physicians reason.

Authors:  R S LEDLEY; L B LUSTED
Journal:  Science       Date:  1959-07-03       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  The combined effect of breast cancer risk factors.

Authors:  V T Farewell
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1977-08       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Gynecological health screening by means of questionnaire and cytology.

Authors:  T Kauraniemi
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  1969       Impact factor: 3.636

5.  Carcinoma in situ of the cervix in Connecticut. A review, 1949-1962.

Authors:  G W Hulme; H S Eisenberg
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1968-10-01       Impact factor: 8.661

6.  Failure of selective screening for breast cancer by combining risk factors.

Authors:  I Soini; M Hakama
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  1978-09-15       Impact factor: 7.396

7.  Selective screening for cervical cancer. Experience of the Finnish mass screening system.

Authors:  M Hakama; E Pukkala
Journal:  Br J Prev Soc Med       Date:  1977-12
  7 in total
  10 in total

1.  Why do we continue to take unnecessary smears?

Authors:  C B Woodman; J Richardson; M Spence
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  The value of primary colposcopy in genitourinary medicine.

Authors:  M Griffiths
Journal:  Genitourin Med       Date:  1994-12

3.  Prospective evaluation of a risk scoring system for cervical neoplasia in primary care.

Authors:  C E Wilkinson; T J Peters; N C Stott; I M Harvey
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  High-risk groups and cervical cancer.

Authors: 
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1980-09-06

5.  Personalized estimates of breast cancer risk in clinical practice and public health.

Authors:  Mitchell H Gail
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-02-21       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 6.  A screening programme that worked: discussion paper.

Authors:  M Hakama
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 18.000

7.  Risk targeting in cervical screening: a new look at an old problem.

Authors:  C E Wilkinson; T J Peters; I M Harvey; N C Stott
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 5.386

8.  A computer simulation model for the practical planning of cervical cancer screening programmes.

Authors:  D M Parkin
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1985-04       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  Routine cervical screening with primary HPV testing and cytology triage protocol in a randomised setting.

Authors:  L Kotaniemi-Talonen; P Nieminen; A Anttila; M Hakama
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2005-10-17       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 10.  Targeted screening in the UK: A narrow concept with broad application.

Authors:  Anna Bobrowska; Molly Murton; Farah Seedat; Cristina Visintin; Anne Mackie; Robert Steele; John Marshall
Journal:  Lancet Reg Health Eur       Date:  2022-04-14
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.