Van den Bruel Ann, Jones Caroline, Yang Yaling, Oke Jason, Hewitson Paul
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6GG, UK
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6GG, UK.
BMJ. 2015 Mar 3;350:h980. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h980.
To describe the level of overdetection people would find acceptable in screening for breast, prostate, and bowel cancer and whether acceptability is influenced by the magnitude of the benefit from screening and the cancer specific harms from overdetection.
Online survey. Women were presented with scenarios on breast and bowel cancer, men with scenarios on prostate and bowel cancer. For each particular cancer, we presented epidemiological information and described the treatment and its consequences. Secondly, we presented two different scenarios of benefit: one indicating a 10% reduction in cancer specific mortality and the second indicating a 50% reduction.
Online survey of the population in the United Kingdom.
Respondents were part of an existing panel of people who volunteer for online research and were invited by email or online marketing. We recruited 1000 respondents, representative for age and sex for the UK population.
Number of cases of overdetection people were willing to accept, ranging from 0-1000 (complete screened population) for each cancer modality and each scenario of benefit.
There was large variability between respondents in the level of overdetection they would find acceptable, with medians ranging from 113 to 313 cases of overdetection per 1000 people screened. Across all scenarios, 4-7% of respondents indicated they would accept no overdetection at all compared with 7-14% who thought that it would be acceptable for the entire screened population to be overdetected. Acceptability in screening for bowel cancer was significantly lower than for breast and prostate cancer. People aged 50 or over accepted significantly less overdetection, whereas people with higher education levels accepted more; 29% of respondents had heard of overdetection before.
Acceptability of overdetection in cancer screening is variable. Invitations for screening should include clear information on the likelihood and consequences of overdetection to allow people to make an informed choice.
描述人们在乳腺癌、前列腺癌和肠癌筛查中可接受的过度诊断水平,以及可接受性是否受筛查获益程度和过度诊断所致癌症特异性危害的影响。
在线调查。向女性展示乳腺癌和肠癌的情景,向男性展示前列腺癌和肠癌的情景。对于每种特定癌症,我们提供了流行病学信息,并描述了治疗方法及其后果。其次,我们展示了两种不同的获益情景:一种表明癌症特异性死亡率降低10%,另一种表明降低50%。
对英国人群进行在线调查。
受访者是现有的自愿参与在线研究的人群小组的一部分,通过电子邮件或在线营销邀请而来。我们招募了1000名受访者,他们在年龄和性别上代表英国人群。
每种癌症类型和每种获益情景下,人们愿意接受的过度诊断病例数,范围为0至1000(完全筛查人群)。
受访者可接受的过度诊断水平差异很大,每1000名接受筛查的人中,过度诊断的中位数在113至313例之间。在所有情景中,4%至7%的受访者表示他们完全不接受过度诊断,相比之下,7%至14%的受访者认为对整个筛查人群进行过度诊断是可以接受的。肠癌筛查的可接受性明显低于乳腺癌和前列腺癌。50岁及以上的人接受的过度诊断明显较少,而受教育程度较高的人接受的较多;29%的受访者之前听说过过度诊断。
癌症筛查中过度诊断的可接受性存在差异。筛查邀请应包括有关过度诊断可能性和后果的明确信息,以便人们做出明智的选择。