ArticleBMC medicine2017
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.
Article in BMC medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Screening for depression in children and adolescents in primary care or non-mental health settings: a systematic review update.Systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Screening for depression among the general adult population and in women during pregnancy or the first-year postpartum: two systematic reviews to inform a guideline of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.Systematic reviews · 2022Guideline
- Depression Screening and Health Outcomes in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review.Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2017Pooled it
- Cost-Effectiveness of Perinatal Depression Screening: A Scoping Review.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Article
- Extending the concept of "obstetric violence" to post-partum experiences: cautions regarding the "first ever" pill for post-partum depression.Sexual and reproductive health matters · 2024Article
- Effectiveness of health checkup with depression screening on depression treatment and outcomes in middle-aged and older adults: a target trial emulation study.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2024Article
- Transparency and completeness of reporting of depression screening tool accuracy studies: A meta-research review of adherence to the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies statement.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2023Review
- Development of an Obesity Information Diagnosis Model Reflecting Body Type Information Using 3D Body Information Values.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Psychometric properties of screening questionnaires to detect depression in primary healthcare setting in rural Ethiopia.BMC primary care · 2022Article
- Sample size and precision of estimates in studies of depression screening tool accuracy: A meta-research review of studies published in 2018-2021.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2022Article
- Diagnoses and Treatment After Depression Screening in Primary Care Among Youth.American journal of preventive medicine · 2022Article
- mHealth Solutions for Perinatal Mental Health: Scoping Review and Appraisal Following the mHealth Index and Navigation Database Framework.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Article
- [GAD-7 Generalised Anxiety Disorder scale in Colombian medical professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic: construct validity and reliability].Revista Colombiana de psiquiatria · 2021Article
- Screening for depression in children and adolescents: a protocol for a systematic review update.Systematic reviews · 2021Article
- Perinatal mental health: a review of progress and challenges.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2020Article
- Drivers of and Solutions for the Overuse of Antidepressant Medication in Pediatric Populations.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2020Article
- Anxiety and Depression in Adults with Congenital Heart Disease: When to Suspect and How to Refer.Current cardiology reports · 2019Review
- Article
- Article
- Update on task force terminology and outreach activities: Advancing guideline usability for the Canadian primary care context.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
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.
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.