SynthesisBMC medicine2022
An international consensus on the essential and desirable criteria for an 'organized' cancer screening programme.
Synthesis in BMC medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 4 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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Global colorectal cancer screening programs and coverage rate estimation: an evidence synthesis.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Barriers and facilitators to cervical cancer screening in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: a systematic review.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- Informing prostate cancer screening policy makers in the European Union: lessons from cancer screening governance and policymaking.European journal of public health · 2025Pooled it
- Association Between Socioeconomic Status and Adherence to Fecal Occult Blood Tests in Colorectal Cancer Screening Programs: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2023Pooled it
- Trial
- Mapping the readiness landscape for prostate cancer screening in Europe: analysis of health system capacity across the PRAISE-U pilots.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Why Organised Cancer Screening Works: Lessons from Slovenia and the Next Phase of Evidence-Based Implementation.Zdravstveno varstvo · 2026Article
- How has Acceptability Been Defined and Measured in Cancer Screening Research? A Scoping Review.Psycho-oncology · 2026Article
- Review
- From evidence to action: the IARC's role in strengthening cancer prevention and early detection.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2026Review
- A method of estimating cervical cancers prevented by the introduction of national screening in Ireland.European journal of public health · 2026Article
- Accelerating the elimination of cervical cancer: cross-sectional examination of cancer prevention and control in Latin America and the Caribbean.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2026Article
- Antiviral drug discovery and development: challenges and future directions.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Review
- Cervical screening-using implementation science tools to maximise impact in a complex world.Gynecology and pelvic medicine · 2026Article
- European Code Against Cancer, 5th edition - organised cancer screening programmes.Molecular oncology · 2026Review
- Cancer control is not a one-time event: why screening must become a life-course system.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Assessment of barriers to the cervical cancer continuum and existing interventions in 5 African countries.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Creating a data processing warehouse to support performance monitoring of cancer screening programmes in Europe using a common set of indicators.European journal of public health · 2025Article
- Development of a Knowledge Base for an Integrated Older Adult Care Model (SMART System) Based on an Intervention Mapping Framework: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR nursing · 2025Article
- Implementation of an electronic health information system using DHIS2 tracker to manage and evaluate the National cervical screening programme in Bangladesh.BMC public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHigh variability in the definition and interpretation of organized cancer screening needs to be addressed systematically. Moreover, the relevance of the current practice of categorizing screening programmes dichotomously into organized or non-organized needs to be revisited in the context of considerable heterogeneity that exists in the delivery of cancer screening in the real world. We aimed to identify the essential and desirable criteria for organized cancer screening that serve as a charter of best practices in cancer screening.
methodsWe first did a systematic review of literature to arrive at an exhaustive list of criteria used by various publications to describe or define organized cancer screening, based on which, a consolidated list of criteria was generated. Next, we used a Delphi process comprising of two rounds of online surveys to seek agreement of experts to categorize each criterion into essential, desirable, or neither. Consensus was considered to have been achieved based on a predetermined criterion of agreement from at least 80% of the experts. The outcomes were presented before the experts in a virtual meeting for feedbacks and clarifications.
resultsA total of 32 consolidated criteria for an organized screening programme were identified and presented to 24 experts from 20 countries to select the essential criteria in the Delphi first round. Total 16 criteria were selected as essential with the topmost criteria (based on the agreement of 96% of experts) being the availability of a protocol/guideline describing at least the target population, screening intervals, screening tests, referral pathway, management of positive cases and a system being in place to identify the eligible populations. In the second round of Delphi, the experts selected eight desirable criteria out of the rest 16. The most agreed upon desirable criterion was existence of a specified organization or a team responsible for programme implementation and/or coordination.
conclusionsWe established an international consensus on essential and desirable criteria, which screening programmes would aspire to fulfil to be better-organized. The harmonized criteria are a ready-to-use guide for programme managers and policymakers to prioritize interventions and resources rather than supporting the dichotomous and simplistic approach of categorizing programmes as organized or non-organized.
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.