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

Pierre-Yves Meunier1, Karfala Maiga2, Denis Maillet3

  • 1Collège universitaire de médecine générale, université Claude-Bernard-Lyon-1, Lyon, France.

Sante Publique (Vandoeuvre-Les-Nancy, France)
|February 13, 2026
PubMed

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

Why Andes hantavirus is not the next SARS-CoV-2: contrasting viral shedding, transmissibility and genomic patterns.

Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin·2026
Same author

Mode of delivery for confirmed macrosomia: a real-life multicentric observational study.

BMC pregnancy and childbirth·2026
Same author

Proactive vs. reactive COVID-19 screening in schools: Lessons from experimental protocols in France during the Delta and Omicron waves.

PNAS nexus·2026
Same author

Selective occlusion of placental vessels using non-invasive focused ultrasound delivered by a toroidal transducer: Preclinical application in a pregnant monkey model for the treatment of twin-twin transfusion syndrome.

Ultrasonics·2026
Same author

Real-world treatment sequences and overall survival in metastatic bladder cancer: The STATES-Bladder study.

Urologic oncology·2026
Same author

Exposure-response relationship of nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma from the randomised phase 2 BIONIKK study.

British journal of cancer·2026
Same journal

Sante publique (Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy, France)·2026
Same journal

Sante publique (Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy, France)·2026
Same journal

Sante publique (Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy, France)·2026
Same journal

Sante publique (Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy, France)·2026
Same journal

Sante publique (Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy, France)·2026
Same journal

Sante publique (Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy, France)·2026
See all related articles
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

The Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS) recommends screening for 67 conditions, including four cancers. This systematic review compares HAS screening protocols with those from the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF).

Area of Science:

  • Public Health
  • Preventive Medicine
  • Health Policy

Background:

  • No prior systematic review of French screening protocols existed.
  • The Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS) and United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) are key bodies for health screening recommendations.
  • Understanding and comparing these recommendations is crucial for public health strategy.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To systematically review HAS screening recommendations.
  • To characterize the nature of HAS screening protocols.
  • To compare HAS recommendations with those of the USPSTF.

Main Methods:

  • A systematic review methodology was employed.
  • Screening recommendations from HAS and USPSTF were analyzed.
Keywords:
Preventive medicineevidence-based practicepublic healthscreening

Related Experiment Videos

  • Data on recommended, not recommended, and uncertain conditions were extracted.

    • Main Results:

    • Fifty-three HAS recommendations covered 74 conditions (67 recommended, 6 not, 1 uncertain).
    • Sixty-seven USPSTF recommendations covered 65 conditions (30 recommended, 7 not, 28 uncertain).
    • HAS screening focused on cardiovascular/metabolic (24%), neonatal (16%), and infectious (16%) conditions; only 25% of HAS recommendations had graded evidence, with 71% based on expert agreement.

    Conclusions:

    • The HAS recommends screening for 67 conditions, including four cancers.
    • There is a need for improved methodology in developing screening recommendations, including clear evidence levels.
    • Enhanced methodology is expected to improve the quality and appropriate use of screening protocols.