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

Screening for disease: making evidence-based choices.

Margaret M Fields1, Eric Chevlen

  • 1pegfields@houston.rr.com

Clinical Journal of Oncology Nursing
|February 18, 2006
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

New cervical cancer screening guidelines: was the annual pap too much of a good thing?

Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology·2014
Same author

How to recognize and treat neoplastic meningitis.

Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology·2014
Same author

Targeting breast cancer with hormonal treatment options.

The Nurse practitioner·2008
Same author

Social factors affecting treatment of cervical cancer: ethical issues and policy implications.

Obstetrics and gynecology·2008
Same author

Ovarian cancer screening: a look at the evidence.

Clinical journal of oncology nursing·2006
Same author

From mechanisms to management: translating the neuropathic pain consensus recommendations into clinical practice.

Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners·2005

Evidence-based screening tests must reduce mortality or morbidity. Healthcare professionals must critically evaluate screening research to avoid harms from false positives and ensure benefits outweigh costs and biases.

Area of Science:

  • Medical Screening
  • Evidence-Based Medicine
  • Clinical Trial Evaluation

Background:

  • Screening tests are valuable only if they demonstrably reduce mortality or morbidity.
  • Healthcare professionals need to critically assess screening research to ensure test efficacy.
  • Potential harms include anxiety from false positives and delayed treatment from false negatives.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To outline criteria for evaluating the utility and validity of illness screening tests.
  • To discuss characteristics of diseases suitable for screening and requirements for effective screening tests.
  • To identify and explain biases that can compromise screening trial results.

Main Methods:

  • Review of principles for evidence-based screening test evaluation.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Discussion of disease characteristics amenable to screening.
  • Explanation of key test performance metrics (sensitivity, specificity, predictive value) and biases (screening, length, lead-time).

    • Main Results:

    • Useful screening requires a significant health impact, an identifiable asymptomatic phase, and improved outcomes with early intervention.
    • Effective screening tests need high sensitivity and specificity, cost-effectiveness, and patient acceptability.
    • Potential biases like screening, length, and lead-time bias can distort outcomes and must be recognized.

    Conclusions:

    • The primary goal of illness screening must be to provide a demonstrable benefit, not merely to perform a test.
    • Critical evaluation of screening research is essential for healthcare professionals to ensure tests are useful and safe.
    • Understanding test characteristics and potential biases is crucial for accurate interpretation of screening trial results.