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

A perspective from countries using organized screening programs.

Anne Miles1, Jill Cockburn, Robert A Smith

  • 1Cancer Research UK Health Behaviour Unit, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Cancer
|August 19, 2004
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

Confronting fear and uncertainty: adults' experiences of undergoing a food challenge test for food allergy.

International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being·2026
Same author

Employ Your Mind (EYM), a vocational rehabilitation and cognitive remediation program: the participants' experience.

Frontiers in psychiatry·2025
Same author

The Impact of an Ostomy on Body Image and Sexual Function of Patients With Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Psycho-oncology·2025
Same author

Preferences for treatment outcomes in rectal cancer: A discrete choice experiment among patients and healthy volunteers.

Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland·2025
Same author

International Survey of Psychosocial Care for Cancer Survivors in Low-/Middle- and High-Income Countries: Current Practices, Barriers, and Facilitators to Care.

JCO global oncology·2024
Same author

Psychosocial care for cancer survivors: A global review of national cancer control plans.

Psycho-oncology·2023
Same journal

Sexual orientation and gender identity based disparities in colorectal, cervical, and breast cancer screening in the United States.

Cancer·2026
Same journal

Toward exercise as standard care for older cancer survivors.

Cancer·2026
Same journal

Maintenance therapy in gynecologic malignancies: Current and future state.

Cancer·2026
Same journal

Long-term outcomes of evolving treatment regimens in Ewing sarcoma survivors diagnosed 1970-1999: A report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study.

Cancer·2026
Same journal

Large-scale osteosarcoma sequencing reveals age-associated genomic architectures.

Cancer·2026
Same journal

EZH2 inhibitor tazemetostat voluntarily withdrawn from market.

Cancer·2026
See all related articles

Organized cancer screening programs, using centralized registers, offer better population coverage, quality control, and cost-effectiveness than opportunistic screening. This leads to greater reductions in cancer incidence and mortality.

Area of Science:

  • Public Health
  • Preventive Medicine
  • Oncology

Background:

  • Cancer screening can be opportunistic or organized.
  • Organized screening uses centralized registers for invitations, while opportunistic screening relies on individual decisions or healthcare encounters.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To outline key differences between organized and opportunistic cancer screening.
  • To compare the effectiveness, quality, and cost-effectiveness of these two screening models.

Main Methods:

  • Literature searches of PubMed and MEDLINE.
  • Interviews with health officials in five countries.
  • Analysis of authors' personal files.

Main Results:

  • Organized screening involves centralized control of invitations, eligibility, quality assurance, follow-up, and evaluation.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Organized programs prioritize population-level mortality/morbidity reduction, potentially using less sensitive tests at suboptimal intervals but ensuring higher quality.
  • Organized screening demonstrated greater potential for reducing cancer incidence/mortality, cost-effectiveness, and protection against screening harms.

    • Conclusions:

    • Organized cancer screening offers superior population coverage, quality control, and monitoring compared to opportunistic screening.
    • Organized programs are more cost-effective and provide better protection against screening-related harms.
    • Organized screening models have a greater potential to reduce cancer incidence and mortality at a population level.