Checklists and screening - A threat against consultations;Checklistor och screening - Ett hot mot konsultationen

Lakartidningen

Volumn 101, Issue 15-16, 2004, Pages 1412-1415

  Sigurdsson, Johann A ^a   Getz, Linn ^a   Hetlevik, Irene ^b  

^a Vårdcentralen Solvangur ^*  (Iceland)

^b NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONSULTATION; HUMAN; MEDICAL PRACTICE; PATIENT CARE; PHYSICIAN; SCREENING; THREAT;

FAMILY PRACTICE; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; PATIENT RIGHTS; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; PHYSICIAN'S ROLE; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES; PREVENTIVE MEDICINE; REFERRAL AND CONSULTATION; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 2042474096     PISSN: 00237205     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Getz L, Sigurdsson JA, Hetlevik I. Is opportunistic disease prevention in the consultation ethically justifiable? BMJ 2003;327:498-500.
2. Stott NC, Davis RH. The exceptional potential in each primary care consultation. J R Coll Gen Pract 1979;29:201-5.
3. Cochrane AL, Holland WW. Validation of screening procedures. Br Med Bull 1971;27:3-8.
4. Lagro-Janssen T, Rosser WW, van Weel C. Breast cancer and hormone-replacement therapy: up to general practice to pick up the pieces. Lancet 2003;362:414-5.
5. Philips LS, Branch WT, Cook CB, Doyle JP, El-Kebbi IM, Gallina DL, et al. Clinical inertia. Ann Intern Med 2001;135:825-34.
6. Yarnall KS, Pollack KI, Östbye T, Krause KM, Michener JL. Primary care: Is there enough time for prevention? Am J Publ Health 2003;93:635-41.
7. Welsh HG. Informed choice in cancer screening. JAMA 2001;285:2776-8.
8. Hvas L. Med blod på tanden, eller længre nede... Månedsskrift for praktisk lægegerning 1997;75:1347-9.
9. Fosså SD, Eri LM, Skovlund E, Tveter K, Vatten L. The Norwegian Urological Cancer Group. No randomised trial of prostate-cancer screening in Norway. Lancet Oncol 2001;2:741-5.
10. Getz L, Kirkengen AL. Ultrasound screening in pregnancy: Advancing technology, soft markers for fetal chromosomal aberrations, and unacknowledged ethical dilemmas. Soc Sci Med 2003;56:2045-57.
11. Gatto NM, Frucht H, Sundararajan V, Jacobson JS, Grann VR, Neugut AL. Risk of perforation after colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy: a population based study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95(3):230-6.
12. Edwards A. Communicating risks. Means that patients too have to learn to live with uncertainty. BMJ 2003;327:691-2.