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

Hazard Ratio01:12

Hazard Ratio

554
The hazard ratio (HR) is a widely used measure in clinical trials to compare the risk of events, such as death or disease recurrence, between two groups over time. It reflects the ratio of hazard rates—the instantaneous risk of the event occurring—between a treatment group and a control group. This measure provides valuable insights into the relative effectiveness of a treatment by assessing how the risk of an event differs between the two groups.
For example, in a clinical trial...
554
Cancer Survival Analysis01:21

Cancer Survival Analysis

634
Cancer survival analysis focuses on quantifying and interpreting the time from a key starting point, such as diagnosis or the initiation of treatment, to a specific endpoint, such as remission or death. This analysis provides critical insights into treatment effectiveness and factors that influence patient outcomes, helping to shape clinical decisions and guide prognostic evaluations. A cornerstone of oncology research, survival analysis tackles the challenges of skewed, non-normally...
634
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches01:23

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

392
Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
392
Cancer Prevention02:59

Cancer Prevention

7.6K
Several factors can increase the risk of cancer in an individual. About 50% of cancer cases can be prevented by adopting a healthy lifestyle, regular exercise, eating healthy, and following a modest cancer prevention diet. Epidemiological studies have consistently shown that populations with vegetable and fruit-rich diets have reduced the incidence of cancer. On the other hand, populations who have a diet rich in animal fat, red meat, junk food, or high calories are predisposed to cancer.
Some...
7.6K
Mutagenicity and Carcinogenicity01:25

Mutagenicity and Carcinogenicity

1.8K
Mutagenicity and carcinogenicity refer to the ability of drugs to cause genetic defects and induce cancer, respectively. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifies agents into four groups based on their carcinogenic potential. Group 1 agents are known human carcinogens; group 2A agents are probably carcinogenic to humans; group 3 agents lack data to support their role in carcinogenesis; and group 4 includes agents for which data support that they are not likely to be...
1.8K
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II01:28

Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II

1.1K
The Bradford Hill criteria serve as guidelines for establishing causative links in epidemiological research. Beyond Strength, Consistency, Specificity, and Temporality, key criteria also include Biological Gradient, Plausibility, Coherence, Experiment, and Analogy. These principles assist scientists in assessing the likelihood of causation in complex biological contexts. Below is a summary of these concepts:
1.1K

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Comparative efficacy of common thrombolytics in acute ischaemic stroke: a network meta-analysis.

Singapore medical journal·2026
Same author

Optimizing reporting and outreach for surveillance and risk-reducing surgeries for cancer genetic predisposition: Findings of a workshop organized by the International Cascade Consortium.

Public health genomics·2026
Same author

Cascade Testing Barriers: How to Overcome?

International journal of cancer·2026
Same author

Understanding shared and sex-specific considerations in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) testing decision-making in Singapore.

Journal of genetic counseling·2026
Same author

Deep learning analysis of breast cancer histology predicts ATM pathogenic variant carrier status.

NPJ digital medicine·2026
Same author

Community-Based Interventions for Initiating Early End-of-Life Conversations in Nonterminally Ill Adults: A Systematic Review.

Campbell systematic reviews·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jan 12, 2026

Competing-Risk Nomogram for Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Multiple Primary Colorectal Cancer Patients after Surgery
06:46

Competing-Risk Nomogram for Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Multiple Primary Colorectal Cancer Patients after Surgery

Published on: September 27, 2024

633

Risk-based screening programmes for cancer diagnosis: A systematic review with narrative synthesis.

Yong Yi Tan1, Sara Tasnim1, Mohammad Fahmy Bin Fadzil1

  • 1Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore
|November 6, 2025
PubMed
Summary

Risk-based screening (RBS) offers a promising alternative to age-based cancer screening. This review found RBS can improve uptake and detection rates, but more long-term data is needed before widespread implementation.

Keywords:
early detection of cancerhealth services and outcomespreventive medicinerisk-based screeningsystematic review

More Related Videos

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.5K
Comparison of Predictive Performance of Three Lymph Node Staging Systems in Colorectal Signet Ring Cell Carcinoma Based on Machine Learning Model
07:13

Comparison of Predictive Performance of Three Lymph Node Staging Systems in Colorectal Signet Ring Cell Carcinoma Based on Machine Learning Model

Published on: April 18, 2025

478

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jan 12, 2026

Competing-Risk Nomogram for Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Multiple Primary Colorectal Cancer Patients after Surgery
06:46

Competing-Risk Nomogram for Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Multiple Primary Colorectal Cancer Patients after Surgery

Published on: September 27, 2024

633
An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.5K
Comparison of Predictive Performance of Three Lymph Node Staging Systems in Colorectal Signet Ring Cell Carcinoma Based on Machine Learning Model
07:13

Comparison of Predictive Performance of Three Lymph Node Staging Systems in Colorectal Signet Ring Cell Carcinoma Based on Machine Learning Model

Published on: April 18, 2025

478

Area of Science:

  • Oncology
  • Public Health
  • Health Services Research

Background:

  • Risk-based screening (RBS) is emerging as a novel strategy for cancer detection, potentially improving upon traditional age-based methods.
  • Existing evidence on the real-world implementation and outcomes of RBS programs is fragmented across various cancer types.
  • A systematic review is crucial to consolidate current knowledge on RBS methodologies and their effectiveness.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To systematically review and synthesize the methodologies and outcomes of risk-based screening (RBS) programs for various cancer types.
  • To evaluate the implementation strategies, diagnostic accuracy, and clinical outcomes associated with RBS.
  • To identify gaps in the evidence base for scaling up RBS programs.

Main Methods:

  • A comprehensive systematic search was conducted across multiple databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane, Scopus) up to July 2024.
  • Included studies comprised prospective trials, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and retrospective evaluations of RBS in asymptomatic populations.
  • Data on geographic distribution, population characteristics, RBS methodology, diagnostic accuracy, and clinical outcomes were narratively synthesized.

Main Results:

  • Thirty-three studies were included, predominantly focusing on colorectal, breast, and prostate cancers, with most trials originating from China, the Netherlands, and the US.
  • Algorithmic approaches (48.5%) were the most common stratification method, followed by validated risk models (39.4%).
  • RBS showed higher uptake in moderate-risk groups and demonstrated cost-effectiveness, improved quality-adjusted life years, and superior or non-inferior cancer detection rates compared to traditional screening.

Conclusions:

  • Risk-based screening holds significant potential for optimizing healthcare resource allocation, minimizing patient harm, and enhancing screening receptiveness.
  • Implementation outcomes suggest favorable uptake and detection rates, with evidence of cost-effectiveness.
  • Further research is required to assess the long-term outcomes of RBS programs before they can be widely scaled.