Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
JAMAarrow_drop_down
JAMA
Article . 1980 . Peer-reviewed
Data sources: Crossref
JAMA
Other literature type . 1980
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Mass Screening: Is It Cost-effective?

Authors: Charles B. Clayman;

Mass Screening: Is It Cost-effective?

Abstract

Reported elsewhere in this issue (p 2056) is the experience of a local cancer detection center in finding cancer of the colon. This report, along with others concerning the routine periodic screening of the asymptomatic population, raises questions regarding the benefits derived from mass screening vs the costs. These expenses are reflected partially in public and private funds required to implement the programs. Heavily increased costs are also incurred by unneeded procedures precipitated by screening studies of limited specificity or sensitivity. When performed without selection, these examinations could include almost any laboratory study, since there is only a chance probability that a clinical indication exists.1Unsupervised self-examination of the breast has been implicated as a cause of emotionally traumatic costly hospitalizations.2Reconsideration of the benefits derived from annual Papanicolaou smears for every woman without selection has caused changes in practice in Great Britain.3,4Annual screening for thyroid

Keywords

Risk, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Humans, Mass Screening, Preventive Medicine, United States

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    10
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
10
Average
Top 10%
Average
Related to Research communities
Cancer Research
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!