ArticleActa medica Philippina2026
Philippine Clinical Practice Guidelines for Periodic Health Examination: Screening for Neoplastic Diseases.
Article in Acta medica Philippina, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: Cancer is among the leading causes of death in the Philippines, with an age-standardized mortality rate of 100 deaths per 100,000 persons. Despite the high incidence and mortality in the country, the Philippines has yet to implement a national early detection or screening program for cancers. The goal of these clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) is to provide evidence-based recommendations on screening for specific types of cancer: retinoblastoma, nasopharyngeal cancer, liver cancer, cervical cancer, oral cancer, colorectal cancer, breast cancer, prostate cancer, lung cancer, and gastric cancer. Methods: The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to CPG development recommended in the Department of Health Manual was followed. There were 10 clinical questions covered in this CPG, of which 9 questions involved asymptomatic or apparently healthy adults, while 1 question involved early detection of retinoblastoma among children. The evidence of net benefit or harm of cancer screening was obtained through a systematic literature search from database inception up to August 2021. Additional information on cost-effectiveness, patient values and preferences, acceptability, feasibility of screening, and its impact on equity was also obtained. The final recommendations were made through consensus by a panel of representatives from multiple stakeholder groups. Results: There were 20 recommendations formulated. Strong recommendations were given to screen the following: patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma using ultrasound with alpha-fetoprotein (AFP); women aged 30 to 65 years for cervical cancer with cervical cytology alone, or high-risk Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing alone, or visual inspection with acetic acid as alternative to Pap smear; adults aged 35 and older who are smokers or alcohol drinkers for oral cancer using visual examination, and women 50 to 69 years for breast cancer using mammography and biennial clinical breast examination. However, strong recommendations were made AGAINST screening for cervical cancer among women aged 21 to 29 years, and AGAINST screening for cervical cancer with high-risk HPV testing in combination with cytology (co-testing). Conclusion: Through a comprehensive and systematic search of the best available evidence, the Neoplastic Diseases Task Force developed 20 recommendations on screening and risk factor assessment for 10 specific questions on neoplastic diseases. These recommendations serve as guidance on screening neoplastic diseases at the primary care level.
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.