Chubak Jessica, Hubbard Rebecca
Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA
Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
J Med Screen. 2016 Dec;23(4):179-185. doi: 10.1177/0969141316630766. Epub 2016 Mar 4.
The importance of cancer screening is well-recognized, yet there is great variation in how adherence is defined and measured. This manuscript identifies measures of screening adherence and discusses how to estimate them.
We begin by describing why screening adherence is of interest: to anticipate long-term outcomes, to understand differences in outcomes across settings, and to identify areas for improvement. We outline questions of interest related to adherence, including questions about uptake, currency or being up-to-date, and longitudinal adherence, and then identify which measures are most appropriate for each question. Our discussion of how to select measures focuses on study inclusion criteria and outcome definitions. Finally, we describe how to estimate different measures using data from two common data sources: survey studies and surveillance studies. Estimation requires consideration of data sources, inclusion criteria, and outcome definitions. Censoring often will be present and must be accounted for.
We conclude that consistent definitions and estimation of adherence to cancer screening guidelines will facilitate comparison across studies, tests, and settings, and help to elucidate areas for future research and intervention.
癌症筛查的重要性已得到广泛认可,但在如何定义和衡量依从性方面存在很大差异。本文确定了筛查依从性的衡量方法,并讨论了如何对其进行估计。
我们首先描述为什么筛查依从性值得关注:预测长期结果、了解不同环境下结果的差异以及确定改进领域。我们概述了与依从性相关的感兴趣的问题,包括关于接受度、时效性或是否最新以及纵向依从性的问题,然后确定哪些措施最适合每个问题。我们对如何选择措施的讨论侧重于研究纳入标准和结果定义。最后,我们描述了如何使用来自两个常见数据源的数据来估计不同的措施:调查研究和监测研究。估计需要考虑数据源、纳入标准和结果定义。删失情况通常会出现,必须加以考虑。
我们得出结论,对癌症筛查指南依从性的一致定义和估计将有助于跨研究、测试和环境进行比较,并有助于阐明未来研究和干预的领域。