Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

[When do screening interventions make sense?].

Klaus Giersiepen1

  • 1Bremer Institut für Präventionsforschung und Sozialmedizin (BIPS), Bremen. giersiep@bips.uni-bremen.de

Zeitschrift Fur Arztliche Fortbildung Und Qualitatssicherung
|April 3, 2003
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

A cohort study of mammography screening finds that comorbidity measures are insufficient for controlling selection bias.

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2018
Same author

[ICD coding quality for outpatient cancer diagnoses in SHI claims data].

Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen·2016
Same author

Benefits and risks of colorectal cancer screening.

Oncology research and treatment·2014
Same author

Accuracy of diagnostic antibody tests for coeliac disease in children: summary of an evidence report.

Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition·2012
Same author

Carpal tunnel syndrome as an occupational disease.

Deutsches Arzteblatt international·2011
Same author

[Planning, implementation and evaluation of cancer screening programs].

Zeitschrift fur arztliche Fortbildung und Qualitatssicherung·2007

Preventive healthcare strategies like screening aim to detect diseases early. However, evidence-based criteria, including proven effectiveness and available treatments, are crucial for successful screening programs.

Area of Science:

  • Public Health
  • Preventive Medicine
  • Health Services Research

Context:

  • Understanding the distinctions between primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention is key in healthcare.
  • Screening programs aim for early disease detection in asymptomatic individuals.
  • The effectiveness of mass screening requires validation through randomized trials.

Purpose:

  • To define the goals of primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention.
  • To highlight the primary objective of screening: early detection.
  • To outline the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria for effective screening programs.

Summary:

  • Primary prevention reduces disease incidence, secondary prevention enables early detection, and tertiary prevention prevents recurrence.
  • Screening's core function is identifying disease in asymptomatic populations, but early detection (lead time) doesn't guarantee increased life expectancy.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Effective screening programs, guided by WHO criteria, necessitate demonstrated efficacy, common health issues, available treatments, and acceptable testing methods.

    • Impact:

    • Emphasizes the need for evidence-based criteria in implementing and evaluating screening programs.
    • Highlights potential shortcomings in current screening programs that may not adhere to established guidelines.
    • Informs policymakers and healthcare providers on the rigorous requirements for successful public health screening initiatives.