Review
doi: 10.1146/annurev.med.60.101107.134802.Cancer screening: the clash of science and intuition
Affiliations
- PMID:18803476
- DOI: 10.1146/annurev.med.60.101107.134802
Item in Clipboard
Review
Cancer screening: the clash of science and intuition
Barnett S Kramer et al. Annu Rev Med.2009.
Display options
Format
Display options
Format
Abstract
The concept of early detection of cancer holds great promise and intuitive appeal. However, powerful biases can mislead clinicians when evaluating the efficacy of screening tests by clinical observation alone. Selection bias, lead-time bias, length-biased sampling, and overdiagnosis are counterintuitive concepts with critical implications for early-detection efforts. This article explains these biases and other common confounders in cancer screening. The most direct and reliable way to avoid being led astray by intuitions is through the use of randomized controlled trials.
Similar articles
- The science of early detection.Kramer BS.Kramer BS.Urol Oncol. 2004 Jul-Aug;22(4):344-7. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2003.04.001.Urol Oncol. 2004.PMID:15283894Review.
- Screening for cancer: evaluating the evidence.Gates TJ.Gates TJ.Am Fam Physician. 2001 Feb 1;63(3):513-22.Am Fam Physician. 2001.PMID:11272300Review.
- [Problems in using survival data of cancer patients as a method of gauging the effectiveness of cancer control efforts].Oshima A.Oshima A.Gan No Rinsho. 1988 Oct;34(12):1637-41.Gan No Rinsho. 1988.PMID:3193607Japanese.
- Bias in breast cancer research in the screening era.Cox B, Sneyd MJ.Cox B, et al.Breast. 2013 Dec;22(6):1041-5. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2013.07.046. Epub 2013 Aug 26.Breast. 2013.PMID:23988397Review.
- Cancer screenings, diagnostic technology evolution, and cancer control.Stracci F.Stracci F.Methods Mol Biol. 2009;471:107-36. doi: 10.1007/978-1-59745-416-2_6.Methods Mol Biol. 2009.PMID:19109777
Cited by
- Personalized medicine: identifying the appropriate patient through biomarkers in oncology.[No authors listed][No authors listed]P T. 2011 Jul;36(7 Suppl 1):3-10.P T. 2011.PMID:21931468Free PMC article.No abstract available.
- A model too far.Freidlin B, Korn EL.Freidlin B, et al.J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Feb;106(2):djt368. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djt368. Epub 2014 Jan 7.J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014.PMID:24399851Free PMC article.No abstract available.
- Do Cervical Cancer Patients Diagnosed with Opportunistic Screening Live Longer? An Arkhangelsk Cancer Registry Study.Roik EE, Nieboer E, Kharkova OA, Grjibovski AM, Postoev VA, Odland JØ.Roik EE, et al.Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017 Nov 26;14(12):1500. doi: 10.3390/ijerph14121500.Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017.PMID:29186874Free PMC article.
- Cancer overdiagnosis: a challenge in the era of screening.Dunn BK, Woloshin S, Xie H, Kramer BS.Dunn BK, et al.J Natl Cancer Cent. 2022 Dec;2(4):235-242. doi: 10.1016/j.jncc.2022.08.005. Epub 2022 Aug 21.J Natl Cancer Cent. 2022.PMID:36568283Free PMC article.
- Early Detection of CKD: Implications for Low-Income, Middle-Income, and High-Income Countries.Tonelli M, Dickinson JA.Tonelli M, et al.J Am Soc Nephrol. 2020 Sep;31(9):1931-1940. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2020030277. Epub 2020 Aug 24.J Am Soc Nephrol. 2020.PMID:32839279Free PMC article.Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources