Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42683045›Full record

ArticleZdravstveno varstvo2026

Why Organised Cancer Screening Works: Lessons from Slovenia and the Next Phase of Evidence-Based Implementation.

Mateja Krajc, Urška Ivanuš

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in Zdravstveno varstvo, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Mateja KrajcInstitute of Oncology Ljubljana, Zaloška cesta 2, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0605-2592
Urška IvanušInstitute of Oncology Ljubljana, Zaloška cesta 2, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7909-522X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Slovenia's experience shows that cancer screening becomes effective only when a test is embedded in an organised, population-based programme that reaches the target population equitably, assures quality across the whole pathway and uses individual- and programme-level data for improvement. Since the national roll-out of Programme ZORA for cervical cancer screening in 2003, followed by DORA for breast cancer screening in 2008 and Programme Svit for colorectal cancer screening in 2009, Slovenia has built a coherent screening infrastructure with visible population effects. Cervical and colorectal cancer incidence and mortality are decreasing, breast cancers detected through DORA are increasingly diagnosed at a localised stage, and Slovenia ranks among the strongest European performers in screening coverage and policy. This editorial argues that these achievements should be understood not as three isolated programme successes, but as the result of governance, registries, quality assurance, legal foundations, public trust and international alignment. The same principles must now guide the modernisation of existing programmes and the cautious, evidence-based introduction of lung, prostate and gastric cancer screening.

Indexed as

Cancer screeningOrganised programmesPublic healthQuality assuranceSlovenia

Identifiers

PMID42683045
PMCPMC13530911

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.