Screening and Test Evaluation Program, Room 301F, Level 3, Edward Ford Building (A27), School of Public Health, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013 Mar 20;105(6):380-6. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djs649. Epub 2013 Feb 1.
Cancer screening is widely practiced and participation is promoted by various social, technical, and commercial drivers, but there are growing concerns about the emerging harms, risks, and costs of cancer screening. Deliberative democracy methods engage citizens in dialogue on substantial and complex problems: especially when evidence and values are important and people need time to understand and consider the relevant issues. Information derived from such deliberations can provide important guidance to cancer screening policies: citizens' values are made explicit, revealing what really matters to people and why. Policy makers can see what informed, rather than uninformed, citizens would decide on the provision of services and information on cancer screening. Caveats can be elicited to guide changes to existing policies and practices. Policies that take account of citizens' opinions through a deliberative democracy process can be considered more legitimate, justifiable, and feasible than those that don't.
癌症筛查被广泛应用,各种社会、技术和商业因素都在推动着癌症筛查的参与,但人们越来越担心癌症筛查带来的新的危害、风险和成本。审议民主方法使公民能够就实质性和复杂的问题进行对话:特别是在证据和价值观很重要且人们需要时间来理解和考虑相关问题时。这种审议所产生的信息可以为癌症筛查政策提供重要指导:明确公民的价值观,揭示人们真正关心的问题以及原因。决策者可以看到知情而非不知情的公民会对提供癌症筛查服务和信息做出何种决定。可以引出警告,以指导对现有政策和做法的改变。通过审议民主程序考虑公民意见的政策比不考虑公民意见的政策更具有合法性、合理性和可行性。