ArticleDeutsches Arzteblatt international2012
Screening: part 19 of a series on evaluation of scientific publications.
Article in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- PROTOCOL: Evidence and Gap Map of Studies of the Effects of Health Interventions to Reduce Out-of-Pocket Expenses.Campbell systematic reviews · 2026Article
- First Results for the Evaluation of the Cervical Cancer Screening Carried Out in 2021 and 2022 in the Context of the Organized Cancer Screening Program (oKFE): Part 1 - Primary Screening.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2025Article
- Quantifying the potential benefits of early detection for pancreatic cancer through a counterfactual simulation modeling analysis.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Gestational diabetes in Germany: Development of screening participation and prevalence.Journal of health monitoring · 2021Article
- The Determination of the Plaque Burden on the Carotid Artery With Ultrasound Significantly Improves the Risk Prediction in Middle-Aged Subjects Compared to PROCAM: An Outcome Study.Cardiology research · 2020Article
- Epidemiological Measures in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2020Review
- To zoom or not to zoom - the training of communicative competencies in times of Covid 19 at Witten/Herdecke University illustrated by the example of "sharing information".GMS journal for medical education · 2020Article
- [Early recognition and screening consultation: a necessary way to improve early detection and treatment in rheumatology? : Overview of the early recognition and screening consultation models for rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases in Germany].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2019Review
- [Principles and fields of application of screening procedures].Der Internist · 2015Article
- Methodological issues for determining intervals of subsequent cancer screening.Epidemiology and health · 2014Article
- Cervical Cancer Screening: Defining the Need for Research.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe early detection of cancer and other diseases is generally considered beneficial, yet there is evidence that in some diseases screening may be of limited benefit. To clarify this issue, we present the statistical principles that underlie screening. Methods We define screening and discuss the conditions for its successful use. We give illustrative examples from among the currently recommended types of screening in Germany and from the recent medical literature, particularly with regard to mammography.
resultsCertain specific conditions must be fulfilled for screening to be beneficial (usually measured by reduced mortality): The screening procedure must be of high quality, and the screening intervals must be well adapted to the distribution of the sojourn time. Alongside its benefits, screening can also cause harm, particularly to the many patients who are given a false positive test result. According to German law, potential participants are entitled to being given all information necessary to make an informed decision about screening.
conclusionJust like clinical interventions, screening programs should be evaluated before they are introduced or, at the latest, at the time of their introduction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.