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 Concept Videos

Genetic Screens02:46

Genetic Screens

5.6K
Genetic screens are tools used to identify genes and mutations responsible for phenotypes of interest. Genetic screens help identify individuals or a group of people at risk of developing  genetic diseases and help them with early intervention, targeted therapy, and reproductive options.
Forward genetic screens
Forward or “classical” genetic screens involve creating random mutations in an organism’s DNA using radiation, mutagens, or insertion of additional bases, which...
5.6K
Regression Toward the Mean01:52

Regression Toward the Mean

6.8K
Regression toward the mean (“RTM”) is a phenomenon in which extremely high or low values—for example, and individual’s blood pressure at a particular moment—appear closer to a group’s average upon remeasuring. Although this statistical peculiarity is the result of random error and chance, it has been problematic across various medical, scientific, financial and psychological applications. In particular, RTM, if not taken into account, can interfere when...
6.8K
Errors occurring during blood pressure monitoring01:25

Errors occurring during blood pressure monitoring

1.3K
Blood pressure monitoring is a crucial clinical procedure in diagnosing and managing various cardiovascular conditions. Despite its significance, the accuracy of blood pressure measurements can be compromised by multiple factors, potentially leading to either falsely high or low readings. These inaccuracies are critical as they can significantly impact patient care. So, it is vital to understand these challenges deeply and adopt strategic approaches to minimize errors.
Several factors...
1.3K
Halo Effect01:27

Halo Effect

391
The halo effect is a cognitive bias in which an individual's overall impression influences judgments about their specific traits. This psychological phenomenon leads people to associate positive characteristics with those they perceive as generally good and negative characteristics with those they view as bad. This effect is particularly influential in social perception, professional evaluations, and decision-making processes.The Psychological Basis of the Halo EffectThe halo effect is rooted...
391
Bias in Epidemiological Studies01:29

Bias in Epidemiological Studies

1.3K
Biases can arise at various stages of research, from study design and data collection to analysis and interpretation. Recognizing and addressing these biases is essential to ensure the validity and reliability of epidemiological findings.Broadly speaking, biases in epidemiology fall into three main categories: selection bias, information bias, and confounding. A more detailed description of possible biases is:  
1.3K
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding01:25

Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding

349
Confounding is a critical issue in epidemiological studies, often leading to misleading conclusions about associations between exposures and outcomes. It occurs when the relationship between the exposure and the outcome is mixed with the effects of other factors that influence the outcome. Given that, addressing confounding is of high importance for drawing accurate inferences in research.
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
349

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Assigning cancer stage to patients using administrative claims data: an example for colon and rectal cancers.

BMC health services research·2025
Same author

Limitations of molecular testing in combination with computerized tomographic for lung cancer screening.

Nature communications·2022
Same journal

Will they use it? Patient and provider acceptance of chatbot screening and counseling for hereditary cancer syndromes in a geographically underserved population.

Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.)·2026
Same journal

The Clinical Application of Refined Risk Estimates (caRe) Study in BRCA1 and BRCA2 Pathogenic Variant Carriers: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.)·2026
Same journal

Simvastatin Treatment in Patients with Liver Cirrhosis: a Phase II Randomized Placebo Controlled Trial Shows Reduction in IL-6 Levels.

Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.)·2026
Same journal

A Neural Network-Enabled, Enzymatic cfDNA Methylation Assay for Colorectal Cancer Early Detection.

Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.)·2026
Same journal

Comparative Analysis of Breast and Cervical Screening Adaptability at a Federally Qualified Health Center.

Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.)·2026
Same journal

Active monitoring versus surgical excision for atypical ductal hyperplasia.

Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.)·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jan 12, 2026

Universal Screening for Prevention of Reading, Writing, and Math Disabilities in Spanish
14:43

Universal Screening for Prevention of Reading, Writing, and Math Disabilities in Spanish

Published on: July 18, 2020

8.5K

Comments on a Misguided Focus on Screening Rates.

Frederic W Grannis1, Bruce Pyenson2

  • 1City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California.

Cancer Prevention Research (Philadelphia, Pa.)
|November 3, 2025
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Lung cancer screening uptake is highest in adults aged 78-79, despite Medicare exclusion. However, biases in data collection methods like the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) may skew these findings, questioning the reliability of uptake measures.

More Related Videos

Using an Automated Hirschberg Test App to Evaluate Ocular Alignment
05:40

Using an Automated Hirschberg Test App to Evaluate Ocular Alignment

Published on: March 24, 2020

15.6K
Highlighting and Reducing the Impact of Negative Aging Stereotypes During Older Adults' Cognitive Testing
06:58

Highlighting and Reducing the Impact of Negative Aging Stereotypes During Older Adults' Cognitive Testing

Published on: January 24, 2020

7.7K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jan 12, 2026

Universal Screening for Prevention of Reading, Writing, and Math Disabilities in Spanish
14:43

Universal Screening for Prevention of Reading, Writing, and Math Disabilities in Spanish

Published on: July 18, 2020

8.5K
Using an Automated Hirschberg Test App to Evaluate Ocular Alignment
05:40

Using an Automated Hirschberg Test App to Evaluate Ocular Alignment

Published on: March 24, 2020

15.6K
Highlighting and Reducing the Impact of Negative Aging Stereotypes During Older Adults' Cognitive Testing
06:58

Highlighting and Reducing the Impact of Negative Aging Stereotypes During Older Adults' Cognitive Testing

Published on: January 24, 2020

7.7K

Area of Science:

  • Public Health
  • Epidemiology
  • Health Services Research

Background:

  • Lung cancer screening guidelines and Medicare coverage influence screening uptake.
  • Previous studies using various data sources have reported differing screening uptake rates.
  • The Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) is a widely used data source for public health surveillance.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To analyze lung cancer screening uptake among different age groups using BRFSS data.
  • To evaluate the reliability of screening uptake measures derived from BRFSS data.
  • To propose alternative metrics for assessing the effectiveness of lung cancer screening programs.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data.
  • Comparison of lung cancer screening uptake rates across age demographics.
  • Critical evaluation of potential biases in self-reported health survey data.

Main Results:

  • Adults aged 78-79 years showed the highest lung cancer screening uptake (32%).
  • BRFSS data indicated higher screening uptake compared to previous studies using other data sources.
  • Concerns were raised regarding social desirability, recall bias, and respondent confusion in BRFSS data.

Conclusions:

  • Hernandez's conclusions on lung cancer screening uptake may be unreliable due to data biases.
  • The utility of uptake measures derived from BRFSS data is questionable.
  • Measuring screening-detected lung cancers in administrative data offers a more robust link to health outcomes.