Optimal interval for routine cytologic screening in the United States

JAMA Internal Medicine

Volumn 173, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 241-242

  Kim, Jane J ^a   Sharma, Monisha ^a   Ortendahl, Jesse ^a  

^a HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER PREVENTION; CANCER SCREENING; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; CYTOLOGY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; NOTE; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; SIMULATION; UNITED STATES; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; MODELS, ECONOMIC; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 84874091898     PISSN: 21686106     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/2013.jamainternmed.1034     Document Type: Note

References (15)

1. Bogdanich W. Radiation offers new cures, and ways to do harm. New York Times. 2010:A1.
2. Pearce MS, Salotti JA, Little MP, McHugh K, Lee C, Kim KP, Howe NL, Ronckers CM, Rajaraman P, Craft AW, Parker L, Gonzales AB. Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk for leukaemia and brain tumours: A retrospective cohort study [published online June 7, 2012]. Lancet. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60815.
3. Fazel R, Krumholz HM, Wang Y, et al. Exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation from medical imaging procedures. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(9):849-857.
4. The measurement, reporting, and management of radiation dose in CT [AAPM Report 96]. AAPM Task Group 23 of the Diagnostic Imaging Council CT Committee. College Park, MD: American Association of Physicists in Medicine; 2008. http://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/RPT-96.pdf. Accessed February 16, 2012.
5. Radiation dose to patients from radiopharmaceuticals (addendum 2 to ICRP publication 53). Ann ICRP. 1998;28(3):1-126.
6. Takakuwa KM, Estepa AT, Shofer FS. Knowledge and attitudes of emergency department patients regarding radiation risk of CT: Effects of age, sex, race, education, insurance, body mass index, pain, and seriousness of illness. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195(5):1151-1158.
7. Bedetti G, Pizzi C, Gavaruzzi G, Lugaresi F, Cicognani A, Picano E. Suboptimal awareness of radiologic dose among patients undergoing cardiac stress scintigraphy. J Am Coll Radiol. 2008;5(2):126-131.
8. Baumann BM, Chen EH, Mills AM, et al. Patient perceptions of computed tomographic imaging and their understanding of radiation risk and exposure. Ann Emerg Med. 2011;58(1):1-7, e2.
9. American Cancer Society. Cancer facts and figures 2011. http://www.cancer .org/Research/CancerFactsFigures/CancerFactsFigures/cancer-facts-figures-2011. Accessed October 4, 2012.
10. Roland KB, Soman A, Benard VB, Saraiya M. Human papillomavirus and Papanicolaou tests screening interval recommendations in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;205(5):447, e1-e8.
11. Spence AR, Goggin P, Franco EL. Process of care failures in invasive cervical cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Prev Med. 2007;45(2-3):93-106.
12. Saslow D, Solomon D, Lawson HW, et al ACS-ASCCP-ASCP Cervical Cancer Guideline Committee. American Cancer Society, American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and American Society for Clinical Pathology screening guidelines for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012;62(3):147-172.
13. Moyer VA; US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for cervical cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2012;156(12):880-891, W312.
14. National Center for Health Statistics. National Health Interview Survey, 2010: Sample Adult Cancer File. Hyattsville, MD: US Department Of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2011.
15. Eichler HG, Kong SX, GerthWC,Mavros P, Jonsson B. Use of cost-effectiveness analysis in health-care resource allocation decision-making: How are costeffectiveness thresholds expected to emerge? Value Health. 2004;7(5):518-528