"Mass Screening" - Books

Result Filters

See FBN1 (MASS) fibrillin 1 in the Gene database

Results: 1 to 20 of 3172 books (14434 items)

<< First< Prev

Page of 159

Next >Last >>

Select item 44670721.

Cystic Fibrosis: Diagnosis and management.

National Guideline Alliance (UK).

London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE); 2017 Oct 25. (NICE Guideline, No. 78.)

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 26591822.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews [Internet].

York (UK): Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (UK); 1995-.

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 44036683.

StatPearls [Internet].

Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 Jan-.

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 34012944.

Endotext [Internet].

Feingold KR, Anawalt B, Blackman MR, et al., editors.

South Dartmouth (MA): MDText.com, Inc.; 2000-.

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 19385665.

Saving Women's Lives: Strategies for Improving Breast Cancer Detection and Diagnosis.

Institute of Medicine (US) and National Research Council (US) Committee on New Approaches to Early Detection and Diagnosis of Breast Cancer; Joy JE, Penhoet EE, Petitti DB, editors.

Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2005.

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 32409646.

Reducing the Odds: Preventing Perinatal Transmission of HIV In The United States.

Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Perinatal Transmission of HIV; National Research Council (US) and Institute of Medicine (US) Board on Children, Youth, and Families; Stoto MA, Almario DA, McCormick MC, editors.

Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 1999.

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 32087487.

Fulfilling the Potential of Cancer Prevention and Early Detection.

Institute of Medicine (US) and National Research Council (US) National Cancer Policy Board; Curry SJ, Byers T, Hewitt M, editors.

Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2003.

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 23580528.

Probe Reports from the NIH Molecular Libraries Program [Internet].

Bethesda (MD): National Center for Biotechnology Information (US); 2010-.

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 32225789.

Extending Medicare Coverage for Preventive and Other Services.

Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Medicare Coverage Extensions; Field MJ, Lawrence RL, Zwanziger L, editors.

Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2000.

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 145898410.

GeneReviews® [Internet].

Adam MP, Feldman J, Mirzaa GM, et al., editors.

Seattle (WA): University of Washington, Seattle; 1993-2024.

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 320041811.

Mammography and Beyond: Developing Technologies for the Early Detection of Breast Cancer.

Institute of Medicine (US) and National Research Council (US) Committee on Technologies for the Early Detection of Breast Cancer; Nass SJ, Henderson IC, Lashof JC, editors.

Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2001.

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 492441412.

Colorectal cancer screening.

IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Cancer-Preventive Interventions.

Lyon (FR): International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2019.

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 290168813.

Screening for Cervical Cancer: A Decision Analysis for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force [Internet].

Kulasingam SL, Havrilesky L, Ghebre R, et al.

Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2011 May. (Evidence Syntheses, No. 86s.)

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 484344814.

Breast cancer screening.

IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Cancer-Preventive Interventions.

Lyon (FR): International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2016.

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 463225615.

Screening to Prevent Osteoporotic Fractures: An Evidence Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force [Internet].

Viswanathan M, Reddy S, Berkman N, et al.

Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2018 Jun. (Evidence Synthesis, No. 162.)

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 221562216.

Screening for Bilirubin Encephalopathy [Internet].

Ip S, Chung M, Trikalinos T, et al.

Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2009 Oct. (Evidence Syntheses, No. 72.)

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 458878617.

Prostate-Specific Antigen-Based Screening for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Evidence Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force [Internet].

Fenton JJ, Weyrich MS, Durbin S, et al.

Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2018 May. (Evidence Synthesis, No. 154.)

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 282152418.

PDQ Cancer Information Summaries [Internet].

Bethesda (MD): National Cancer Institute (US); 2002-.

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 465505219.

Screening for Intimate Partner Violence, Elder Abuse, and Abuse of Vulnerable Adults: An Evidence Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force [Internet].

Feltner C, Wallace I, Berkman N, et al.

Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2018 Oct. (Evidence Synthesis, No. 169.)

Top results in this book Table of Contents

Select item 265094620.

Screening for Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Evidence Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force [Internet].

Vesco KK, Whitlock EP, Eder M, et al.

Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2011 May. (Evidence Syntheses, No. 86.)

Top results in this book Table of Contents

<< First< Prev

Page of 159

Next >Last >>

Supplemental Content

Images search in Bookshelf

Slide 6Sources of Cost Estimates

SLIDE 6 NOTES: The first two sources of data for estimating procedure or program costs involve direct measurement of the inputs (and their values) that go into performing specific tasks involved in screening and treatment. They are not widely available, but they may merit more work, because the alternative source of costing data -- administered prices – are largely based on custom, history, and relative bargaining power of the buyers and sellers of procedures. They may be only loosely related to the true quantity and value of inputs required to produce the procedure or service. This is particularly true if the price of a screening procedure is based on its use as a diagnostic service, which can involve very different resource requirements. Consequently, I believe that relying on historical prices to represent the true resource cost of a mass screening program probably overestimates the true screening cost. Yet, it may be disingenuous to base a cost-effectiveness analysis on an efficient price, drawn perhaps from a time-and-motion study, when in fact the patient or health plan will have to pay the price established through an administered pricing system. In that case, the realized cost may be two or three times higher than those assumed in the cost-effectiveness analysis.

Cost Issues in Cost Effectiveness Modeling of Colorectal Cancer Screening.

Institute of Medicine (US); National Research Council (US); Pignone M, Russell L, Wagner J, editors. Economic Models of Colorectal Cancer Screening in Average-Risk Adults: Workshop Summary. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2005.
Slide 10What is known about compliance with follow-up for a positive test and for post-polypectomy surveillance?

SLIDE 10 NOTES: All studies were regional; there are no national data on follow-up. The majority of studies reviewed by Dr. Yabroff and her colleagues were conducted in clinics, programs, or health care systems that had mechanisms for tracking follow-up care (Yabroff et al., 2003; Bastani et al., under review). The actual prevalence of follow-up may be lower outside of organized systems of care or for the uninsured.
A study by Myers and colleagues (Myers et al., 2001) compared measurement of complete diagnostic evaluation after a positive FOBT by 4 methods – external chart review, internal chart audit, administrative data review, and a combination of chart review and administrative data notes – and found that rates ranged from 49 to 79%. Regardless of how measured, prevalence is less than optimal and may compromise the effectiveness of mass screening programs. We do not know the impact of delayed, incomplete, or no follow-up on stage of disease at diagnosis because population-based data on follow-up care are not routinely collected.
Dr. Yabroff and her colleagues conclude that: “Increasing the availability of screening follow-up data will be an important area for future evaluations of the quality of care provided in screening programs.”
To my knowledge, there are no published data of post-polypectomy surveillance.

Current Evidence on Compliance.

Institute of Medicine (US); National Research Council (US); Pignone M, Russell L, Wagner J, editors. Economic Models of Colorectal Cancer Screening in Average-Risk Adults: Workshop Summary. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2005.