Literature DB >> 8800074

Prevention. How much harm? How much benefit? 3. Physical, psychological and social harm.

K G Marshall1.   

Abstract

Harm caused by preventive programs may be physical, psychological, social or, if informed consent has not been obtained, ethical. Adverse effects of preventive screening programs may occur at any of the three levels of the "screening cascade", the screening procedure itself, the investigation of abnormal results of screening tests or the treatment of detected abnormalities or diseases. The greatest harm occurs at the second and third levels. Examples of procedures that may cause physical harm are venipuncture, mammography, colonoscopy, breast biopsy, transrectal ultrasonography, prostate biopsy, weight-reducing and cholesterol-lowering diets and radical prostatectomy. The psychological and social harm of preventive programs involves anticipated discomfort or perception of adverse effects of preventive interventions; unpleasant interactions with health care workers, time required for preventive programs, excessive overall awareness of health, anxiety over the results of a screening test implications of a positive screening test, consequences of being labelled as "sick" or "at risk," psychopathologic effects induced directly by preventive programs and, in the case of a false-negative test result, false assurance of disease-free status. Since the positive predictive value of screening tests in the general population is always low, most abnormal test results are "false-positive," these engender a great deal of psychological discuss among patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8800074      PMCID: PMC1487962     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  CMAJ        ISSN: 0820-3946            Impact factor:   8.262


  83 in total

1.  Discomfort and pain during mammography: description, prediction, and prevention.

Authors:  D R Rutter; M Calnan; M S Vaile; S Field; K A Wade
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1992-08-22

2.  The last well person.

Authors:  C K Meador
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1994-02-10       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Fatal anaerobic infection following transrectal biopsy of a rare prostatic tumour.

Authors:  S F Brewster; N Rooney; J Kabala; R C Feneley
Journal:  Br J Urol       Date:  1993-12

Review 4.  Children on adult diets: is it harmful? Is it healthful?

Authors:  F Lifshitz
Journal:  J Am Coll Nutr       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 3.169

Review 5.  The psychological costs of screening for cancer.

Authors:  J Wardle; R Pope
Journal:  J Psychosom Res       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 3.006

6.  Low serum cholesterol concentration and short term mortality from injuries in men and women.

Authors:  G Lindberg; L Råstam; B Gullberg; G A Eklund
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1992-08-01

7.  Assessing possible hazards of reducing serum cholesterol.

Authors:  M R Law; S G Thompson; N J Wald
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1994-02-05

8.  Complications of ultrasound-guided transperineal prostate biopsy. A prospective study.

Authors:  J A Webb; K Shanmuganathan; A McLean
Journal:  Br J Urol       Date:  1993-11

9.  Taking the jab out of needles.

Authors:  B Givens; S Oberle; J Lander
Journal:  Can Nurse       Date:  1993-11

10.  A study of needle stick injuries among medical undergraduates.

Authors:  H P Chia; D Koh; J Jeyaratnam
Journal:  Ann Acad Med Singapore       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 2.473

View more
  16 in total

1.  Preventive medicine in people at high risk for chronic disease: the value of identifying and treating diabetes.

Authors:  H C Gerstein; S Meltzer
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1999-06-01       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  The folly of population screening for type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  K G Marshall
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1999-06-01       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Population-based fecal occult blood screening for colon cancer: will the benefits outweigh the harm?

Authors:  K G Marshall
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2000-09-05       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  Screening and the family physician.

Authors:  Nicholas Pimlott
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 3.275

5.  Mass screening for celiac disease from the perspective of newly diagnosed adolescents and their parents: a mixed-method study.

Authors:  Anna Rosén; Maria Emmelin; Annelie Carlsson; Solveig Hammarroth; Eva Karlsson; Anneli Ivarsson
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2011-10-21       Impact factor: 3.295

6.  Being 'at-risk' for developing cancer: cognitive representations and psychological outcomes.

Authors:  Shoshana Shiloh; Erga Drori; Avi Orr-Urtreger; Eitan Friedman
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2008-09-19

Review 7.  Do the benefits outweigh the side effects of colorectal cancer surveillance? A systematic review.

Authors:  Knut Magne Augestad; Johnie Rose; Benjamin Crawshaw; Gregory Cooper; Conor Delaney
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2014-05-15

Review 8.  Pap test results. Responding to Bethesda system reports.

Authors:  T J Colgan
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 3.275

Review 9.  The adrenal incidentaloma: disease of modern technology and public health problem.

Authors:  D C Aron
Journal:  Rev Endocr Metab Disord       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 6.514

10.  Record linkage as a research tool for office-based medical care.

Authors:  M M Finkelstein
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 3.275

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.