Early recognition, screening - Objectives and concept, part II;Früherkennung, screening - Zielsetzung und gesetzmäß igkeiten, teil II

Zeitschrift fur Allgemeinmedizin

Volumn 86, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 53-62

  Abholz, Heinz Harald ^a   Lerch, Christian ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL DÜSSELDORF   (Germany)

Author keywords

Biostatistics; Ethics; Health care; Screening

Indexed keywords

BIOSTATISTICS; HEALTH CARE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; RESEARCH ETHICS; REVIEW; SCREENING;

EID: 77954411257     PISSN: 09376801     EISSN: 14399229     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3238/zfa.2010.0053     Document Type: Review

References (34)

1. Holland WW, Stewart S. Screening in disease prevention: What works? Abingdon: Radcliffe Publishing Ltd., 2005
2. Welch HG. Should I be tested for cancer? California: University of California Press, 2004
3. Wärnberg F, Bergh J, Holmberg L. Prognosis of woman with a carcinoma in situ of the breast: A population based study in Sweden. Cancer Epid Biomerk Prev 1999; 8: 769-74
4. Schiffman M, Castle PE, Jeronimo J, Rodriguez AC, Wacholder S. Human papillomavirus and cervical cancer. Lancet 2007; 370: 890-907
5. Schilling FH, Spix C Berthold F et al. Neuroblastoma screening at one year of age. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 1047-1053
6. Woods WG, Gao RN, Shuster JJ et al. Screening of infants and mortality due to neuroblastoma. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 1041-1046 (Pubitemid 34984617)
7. Wilson JMG, Jungner YG. Principles and practice of screening for disease. Genf: WHO, Publ. Hlth. Papers No 34, 1968
8. Abholz H-H. Ethische Probleme bei der Früherkennung. Z Allg Med 2001; 77: 398-402
9. Nuffield Council of Bioethics. Lord Krebs (Chairman). Public Health issues. London: Nuffield Council, 2007
10. Abholz H-H. Der Nutzen von Früherkennungsuntersuchungen - Am Beispiel des Lungen-, Brustdrüsen- und Gebärmutterhalskarzinoms sowie polyvalenter Screenings. Berlin: Argument-Sonderband; AS 17, 1977
11. Abholz H-H. Was ist Früherkennung, was kann sie leisten? Am Beispiel der Karzinom-Früherkennung. Hamburg: Argument Sonderband; AS 178, 1988
12. Black C, Bagust A, Boland A et al. The clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of computed tomography screening for lung cancer: systematic reviews. Southhampton: Health Technology Assessment, 2006, Volume 10, number 3
13. Hollander MH, Paarlberg KM, Huisjes AJM. Gestational diabetes: a review of the current literature and guidelines. Obstet Gynec Survey 2007; 65, No 2: 125-136 (Pubitemid 46146816)
14. Gonzales de Berrington A. Computer tomography and screening: safe and effective? J Med Screen 2007; 14: 105-106
15. Salman RAS, Whiteley WN, Warlow C. Screening using whole-body magnetic resonance imaging scanning: who wants an incidentaloma? J Med Screen 2007; 14: 2-4
16. Nelson HD, Westhoff C, Piepert J, Berg A. Screening for ovarian cancer: Brief evidence update. USPSTF, Guide to Clinical Preventive Services, 3rd ed., 2004. www.preventiveservices.ahrg.gov
17. Cuckle HS, Wald N. Principles of screening: Tests using single markers. In: Antenatal and neonatal screening, second edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000: 1-22
18. Brown J, Bryan S, Warren R. Mammography screening: an incremental cost effectiveness analysis of double versus single reading of mammograms. BMJ 1996; 312: 809-812 (Pubitemid 26099299)
19. Boys C, Cunningham C, McKenna D, Robertson P, Weeks DJ, Wishart J. Prenatal screening for Down's syndrome: editorial responsibilities. Lancet 2008; 372: 1789-1791
20. Hakama M, Auvinen A, Day NE, Miller B. Sensitivity in cancer screening. J Med Screen 2007; 14: 174-7
21. DECODE study group: Glucose tolerance and mortality: Comparison of WHO and American Diabetes Association diagnostic criteria. Lancet 1999; 354: 617-21
22. Wong TY, Liew G, Tapp RJ et al. Relation between fasting glucose and retinopathy for diagnosis of diabetes: three population based cross-sectional studies. Lancet 2008; 371: 736-43
23. Pederson E. Presymptomatic diagnosis: cervix uteri and breast. J Roy Soc Med 1966; 59: 1189-98
24. Stamey TA, Caldwell M, McNeal JE et al. The prostate specific antigen era in the United States is over for prostate cancer: what happened in the last 20 years? J Urol 2004; 172: 1297-1301
25. Barry MJ. Screening for Prostate Cancer among Men 75 Years of Age or Older. N Engl J Med 2008; 359: 2515-2516
26. Baker SG, Kramer BS. Estimating the cumulative risk of a false-positive under a regimen involving various types of a cancer screening tests. J Med Screen 2008; 15: 18-22
27. Njor SH, Olsen AH, Schwartz W, Vejborg I, Lynge E. Predicting the risk of a false-positive test for women following a mammography screening programme. J Med Screen 2007; 14: 94-97 (Pubitemid 47067764)
28. Schmidt JG. Früherkennung und Umgang mit Risikofaktoren. In: Kochen MM. Allgemeinmedizin und Familienmedizin. Stuttgart: Thieme, 2006, 3. Aufl.
29. Fitzpatrick M. The tyranny of health - doctors and the regulation of lifestyle. London: Routledge, 2001
30. Croyle RT (Hrsg). Psychosocial effects of screening for disease prevention and detection. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995
31. Furedi F. Culture of fear - Risk-taking and the morality of low expectation. London and Washington: Cassell, 1997
32. Othman C, Wollny A, Abholz H-H, Altiner A. Die Gesundheitsuntersuchung - ein ungeliebtes Stiefkind? Eine Qualitative Untersuchung. Z Allg Med 2008; 84: 280-85
33. Health Council of the Netherlands. Screening: between hope and hype. The Hague: Health Council of the Netherlands, 2008
34. Gummersbach E, Piccoliori G, Oriol Zerbe C et al. Are women getting relevant information about mammography screening for an informed consent: a critical appraisal of information brochures used for screening invitation in Germany, Italy, Spain and France. European Journal of Public Health 2009; doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckp174