首页> 外文期刊>BMC Medicine >Consistency and sources of divergence in recommendations on screening with questionnaires for presently experienced health problems or symptoms: a comparison of recommendations from the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, UK National Screening Committee, and US Preventive Services Task Force
【24h】

Consistency and sources of divergence in recommendations on screening with questionnaires for presently experienced health problems or symptoms: a comparison of recommendations from the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, UK National Screening Committee, and US Preventive Services Task Force

机译:关于针对当前遇到的健康问题或症状进行问卷调查的筛查建议的一致性和差异来源:加拿大预防保健工作小组,英国国家筛查委员会和美国预防服务工作队的建议比较

获取原文
       

摘要

BackgroundRecently, health screening recommendations have gone beyond screening for early-stage, asymptomatic disease to include “screening” for presently experienced health problems and symptoms using self-report questionnaires. We examined recommendations from three major national guideline organizations to determine the consistency of recommendations, identify sources of divergent recommendations, and determine if guideline organizations have identified any direct randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence for the effectiveness of questionnaire-based screening. MethodsWe reviewed recommendation statements listed by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (CTFPHC), the United Kingdom National Screening Committee (UKNSC), and the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) as of 5 September 2016. Eligible recommendations focused on using self-report questionnaires to identify patients with presently experienced health problems or symptoms. Within each recommendation and accompanying evidence review we identified screening RCTs. ResultsWe identified 22 separate recommendations on questionnaire-based screening, including three CTFPHC recommendations against screening, eight UKNSC recommendations against screening, four USPSTF recommendations in favor of screening (alcohol misuse, adolescent depression, adult depression, intimate partner violence), and seven USPSTF recommendations that did not recommend for or against screening. In the four cases where the USPSTF recommended screening, either the CTFPHC, the UKNSC, or both recommended against. When recommendations diverged, the USPSTF expressed confidence in benefits based on indirect evidence, evaluated potential harms as minimal, and did not consider cost or resource use. CTFPHC and UKNSC recommendations against screening, on the other hand, focused on the lack of direct evidence of benefit and raised concerns about harms to patients and resource use. Of six RCTs that directly evaluated screening interventions, five did not report any statistically significant primary or secondary health outcomes in favor of screening, and one trial reported equivocal results. ConclusionsOnly the USPSTF has made any recommendations for screening with questionnaires for presently experienced problems or symptoms. The CTFPHC and UKNSC recommended against screening in all of their recommendations. Differences in recommendations appear to reflect differences in willingness to assume benefit from indirect evidence and different approaches to assessing possible harms and resource consumption. There were no examples in any recommendations of RCTs with direct evidence of improved health outcomes.
机译:背景技术最近,健康筛查的建议已经超出了筛查早期无症状疾病的范围,包括使用自我报告调查表对当前遇到的健康问题和症状进行“筛查”。我们检查了来自三个主要国家指南组织的建议,以确定建议的一致性,确定不同建议的来源,并确定指南组织是否已针对基于问卷的筛查的有效性确定了任何直接的随机对照试验(RCT)证据。方法我们审查了截至2016年9月5日加拿大预防保健工作队(CTFPHC),英国国家筛查委员会(UKNSC)和美国预防服务工作队(USPSTF)列出的建议声明。自我报告调查表,以识别当前遇到健康问题或症状的患者。在每个建议和随附的证据审查中,我们确定了筛查RCT。结果我们在基于问卷的筛查中确定了22项单独建议,包括3项反对筛查的CTFPHC建议,8项反对筛查的UKNSC建议,4项赞成筛查的USPSTF建议(酒精滥用,青少年抑郁,成人抑郁,亲密伴侣暴力)和7项USPSTF建议不建议您赞成或反对筛选。在USPSTF建议进行筛查的四种情况下,CTFPHC,UKNSC或两者都建议反对。当建议分歧时,USPSTF根据间接证据对收益表示信任,将潜在危害评估为最小,并且不考虑成本或资源使用。另一方面,CTFPHC和UKNSC反对筛查的建议集中于缺乏直接受益的证据,并引起对患者伤害和资源使用的担忧。在直接评估筛查干预措施的6项RCT中,有5例未报告任何统计学上显着的有利于筛查的一级或二级健康结局,而一项试验则报告了模棱两可的结果。结论只有USPSTF提出了有关通过问卷调查筛查当前遇到的问题或症状的任何建议。 CTFPHC和UKNSC在所有建议中均建议不要进行筛查。建议中的差异似乎反映了从间接证据中获得收益的意愿和评估可能危害和资源消耗的方法不同。在RCT的任何建议中都没有实例直接证明改善健康状况。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号