Iranian national thalassaemia screening programme.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Samavat A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC527686 | biostudies-literature | 2004 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Iranian national thalassaemia screening programme.
Samavat Ashraf A Modell Bernadette B
BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 20041101 7475
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC1420723 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCOPD is the most prevalent chronic respiratory disease in China. It is estimated that there is a large, as-yet undetected, high-risk population who will develop in COPD in future.Methods and designIn this context, a nationwide COPD screening programme was launched on 9 October 2021. This multistage sequential screening programme incorporates a previously validated questionnaire (i.e. COPD Screening Questionnaire) and pre- and post-bronchodilator spirometry to target the COPD high-risk population. The programme plans to recruit 800 000 participants (eligible age 35-75 years) from 160 districts or counties of 31 provinces, autonomous regions or municipalities across China. The filtered COPD high-risk population and early-detected COPD patients will receive integrated management and be followed-up for ≥1 year.DiscussionThis is the first large-scale prospective study to determine the net benefit of mass screening for COPD in China. Whether the smoking cessation rate, morbidity, mortality and health status of individuals at high risk of COPD could be improved along with this systematic screening programme will be observed and validated. Moreover, the diagnostic accuracy, cost-effectiveness and superiority of the screening programme will also be assessed and discussed. The programme marks a remarkable achievement in the management of chronic respiratory disease in China.
| S-EPMC10123511 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe phased implementation of the National Chlamydia Screening Programme (NCSP) began in September 2002. The NCSP offers opportunistic screening for chlamydia to women and men under 25 years of age attending clinical and non-clinical screening venues using non-invasive urine or vulvo-vaginal swab samples tested via nucleic acid amplification. This review describes the implementation of the NCSP, reports positivity rates for the first year, and explores risk factors for genital chlamydial infection.MethodsCross sectional study of the first year's screening data from the NCSP. A standardised core dataset for each screening test was collected from 302 screening venues, excluding genitourinary medicine (GUM) clinics, across 10 phase 1 programme areas. We estimated chlamydia positivity by demographic and behavioural characteristics, and investigated factors associated with infection through univariate and multivariate analyses.ResultsChlamydia positivity among people under 25 years of age screened in non-GUM settings was 10.1% (1538/15 241) in women and 13.3% (156/1172) in men. Risk factors varied by sex: for women-age 16-19, non-white ethnicity, and sexual behaviours were associated with infection; for men-only age 20-24 and non-white ethnicity were associated with infection.DiscussionIn the first phase of the NCSP, 16 413 opportunistic screens among young adults under 25 years of age were performed at non-GUM settings and testing volume increased over time. Rates of disease were similar to those found during the English screening pilot and were comparable to the first year of widespread screening in Sweden and the United States. The screening programme in England will continue to expand as further phases are included, with national coverage anticipated by 2008.
| S-EPMC1744892 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsDiabetic retinopathy screening aims to detect people at risk of visual loss due to proliferative diabetic retinopathy, but also refers cases of suspected macular oedema (maculopathy). At the introduction of screening, ophthalmology was concerned that referral rates would be unmanageable. We report yield of referable disease by referral reason for the first 5 years of the programme.MethodsWe extracted screening results from a nationwide clinical diabetes database to calculate annual referral rates to ophthalmic clinics. We used logistic regression to examine associations between clinical measures and referable disease.Results182 397 people underwent ≥ 1successful retinal screening between 2006 and 2010. The yield of referable eye disease was highest in the first 2 years of screening (7.0% and 6.0%) before stabilising at ∼4.3%. The majority of referrals are due to maculopathy with 73% of referrals in 2010 based on a finding of maculopathy.ConclusionsThe commonest cause for referral is for suspected macular oedema (maculopathy). Referral rates for retinopathy have stabilised, as predicted, at relatively low rates. However, ophthalmology workload continues to rise as new treatment options (ie, monthly intraocular injections) have unexpectedly increased the impact on ophthalmology. A review of the screening referral path for maculopathy may be timely.
| S-EPMC4033179 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:To investigate use of dual tests for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae on samples collected through the National Chlamydia Screening Programme (NCSP) in England. DESIGN AND SETTING:During May-July 2013, we delivered an online survey to commissioners of sexual health services in the 152 upper-tier English Local Authorities (LAs) who were responsible for commissioning chlamydia screening in people aged 15-24 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:(1) The proportion of English LAs using dual tests on samples collected by the NCSP; (2) The estimated number of gonorrhoea tests and false positives from samples collected by the NCSP, calculated using national surveillance data on the number of chlamydia tests performed, assuming the gonorrhoea prevalence to range between 0.1% and 1%, and test sensitivity and specificity of 99.5%. RESULTS:64% (98/152) of LAs responded to this national survey; over half (53% (52/98)) reported currently using dual tests in community settings. There was no significant difference between LAs using and not using dual tests by chlamydia positivity, chlamydia diagnosis rate or population screening coverage. Although positive gonorrhoea results were confirmed with supplementary tests in 93% (38/41) of LAs, this occurred after patients were notified about the initial positive result in 63% (26/41). Approximately 450-4500 confirmed gonorrhoea diagnoses and 2300 false-positive screens might occur through use of dual tests on NCSP samples each year. Under reasonable assumptions, the positive predictive value of the screening test is 17-67%. CONCLUSIONS:Over half of English LAs already commission dual tests for samples collected by the NCSP. Gonorrhoea screening has been introduced alongside chlamydia screening in many low prevalence settings without a national evidence review or change of policy. We question the public health benefit here, and suggest that robust testing algorithms and clinical management pathways, together with rigorous evaluation, be implemented wherever dual tests are deployed.
| S-EPMC4201998 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Although gastric cancer screening is common among countries with a high prevalence of gastric cancer, there is little data to support the effectiveness of this screening. This study was designed to determine the differences in stage at diagnosis of gastric cancer according to the screening history and screening method (upper gastrointestinal series (UGIS) vs endoscopy). METHODS: The study population was derived from the National Cancer Screening Programme (NCSP), a nationwide organised screening programme in Korea. The study cohort consisted of 19 168 gastric cancer patients who had been diagnosed in 2007 and who were invited to undergo gastric cancer screening via the NCSP between 2002 and 2007. RESULTS: Compared with never-screened patients, the odds ratios for being diagnosed with localised gastric cancer in endoscopy-screened patients and UGIS-screened patients were 2.10 (95% CI=1.90-2.33) and 1.24 (95% CI=1.13-1.36), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Screening by endoscopy was more strongly associated with a diagnosis of localised stage gastric cancer compared with screening by UGIS.
| S-EPMC4453643 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundSurvival of childhood, adolescent and young adult (CAYA) cancers has increased with progress in the management of the treatments and has reached more than 80% at 5 years. Nevertheless, these survivors are at great risk of second cancers and non-malignant co-morbidities in later life. DeNaCaPST is a non-interventional study whose aim is to organize a national screening for thyroid cancer and breast cancer in survivors of CAYA cancers. It will study the compliance with international recommendations, with the aim, regarding a breast screening programme, of offering for every woman living in France, at equal risk, an equal screening.MethodDeNaCaPST trial is coordinated by the INSERM 1018 unit in cooperation with the LEA (French Childhood Cancer Survivor Study for Leukaemia) study's coordinators, the long term follow up committee and the paediatric radiation committee of the SFCE (French Society of Childhood Cancers). A total of 35 centres spread across metropolitan France and la Reunion will participate. FCCSS (French Childhood Cancer Survivor Study), LEA and central registry will be interrogated to identify eligible patients. To participate, centers agreed to perform a complete "long-term follow-up consultations" according to good clinical practice and the guidelines of the SFCE (French Society of Children Cancers).DiscussionAs survival has greatly improved in childhood cancers, detection of therapy-related malignancies has become a priority even if new radiation techniques will lead to better protection for organs at risk. International guidelines have been put in place because of the evidence for increased lifetime risk of breast and thyroid cancer. DeNaCaPST is based on these international recommendations but it is important to recognize that they are based on expert consensus opinion and are supported by neither nonrandomized observational studies nor prospective randomized trials in this specific population. Over-diagnosis is a phenomenon inherent in any screening program and therefore such programs must be evaluated.
| S-EPMC5427546 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe aim was to evaluate whether this gastric cancer-screening programme was effective in reducing oesophageal cancer mortality.MethodsA population-based retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Korean National Cancer Screening Programme (NCSP) database. The study cohort comprised 16,969 oesophageal cancer patients who had been diagnosed in 2007-2014. We analysed the association between the history of NSCP for gastric cancer and oesophageal cancer mortality.ResultsCompared with never-screened subjects, ever-screened subjects had an overall HR for oesophageal cancer mortality of 0.647 (95% CI, 0.617-0.679). According to the time interval since screening, the HRs of death were 0.731 (95% CI, 0.667-0.801) for 6-11 months, 0.635 (95% CI, 0.594-0.679) for 12-23 months, 0.564 (95% CI, 0.522-0.610) for 24-35 months and 0.742 (95% CI, 0.679-0.810) for ≥36 months. According to the last screening modality, the HRs of death were 0.497 (95% CI, 0.464-0.531) for upper endoscopy, and 0.792 (95% CI, 0.749-0.838) for UGIS. Upper endoscopy reduced the mortality consistently in all age groups over 50 years, whereas UGIS could not.ConclusionThe NCSP for gastric cancer was effective in reducing the mortality of oesophageal cancer, and upper endoscopy was superior to UGIS.
| S-EPMC7403142 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIt is crucial to determine feasibility of risk-stratified screening to facilitate successful implementation. We introduced risk-stratification (BC-Predict) into the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) at three screening sites in north-west England from 2019 to 2021. The present study investigated the views of healthcare professionals (HCPs) on acceptability, barriers, and facilitators of the BC-Predict intervention and on the wider implementation of risk-based screening after BC-Predict was implemented in their screening site.MethodsFourteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with HCPs working across the breast screening pathway at three NHSBSP sites that implemented BC-Predict. Thematic analysis interpreted the data.ResultsThree pre-decided themes were produced. (1) Acceptability of risk-based screening: risk-stratification was perceived as a beneficial step for both services and women. HCPs across the pathway reported low burden of running the BC-Predict trial on routine tasks, but with some residual concerns; (2) Barriers to implementation: comprised capacity constraints of services including the inadequacy of current IT systems to manage women with different risk profiles and, (3) Facilitators to implementation: included the continuation of stakeholder consultation across the pathway to inform implementation and need for dedicated risk screening admin staff, a push for mammography staff recruitment and guidance for screening services. Telephone helplines, integrating primary care, and supporting access for all language needs was emphasised.ConclusionRisk-stratified breast screening was viewed as a progressive step providing it does not worsen inequalities for women. Implementation of risk-stratified breast screening requires staff to be reassured that there will be systems in place to support implementation and that it will not further burden their workload. Next steps require a comprehensive assessment of the resource needed for risk-stratification versus current resource availability, upgrades to screening IT and building screening infrastructure. The role of primary care needs to be determined. Simplification and clarification of risk-based screening pathways is needed to support HCPs agency and facilitate implementation. Forthcoming evidence from ongoing randomised controlled trials assessing effectiveness of breast cancer risk-stratification will also determine implementation.
| S-EPMC9555254 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) in England does not involve general practitioners (GPs). Uptake is ∼58%. The Practice Endorsed Additional Reminder Letter (PEARL) study piloted a GP-endorsed reminder letter.MethodsGeneral practices in Wessex with uptake <55% (prevalent invitations) were invited to participate. Subjects who had been invited for screening, sent a standard 28-day BCSP reminder letter but had not returned a test kit within 30 days of the standard reminder were sent a second reminder letter bearing the GP's letterhead and signature. Uptake was compared between PEARL and non-PEARL practices by standardised uptake ratio (standardised for prior prevalent uptake and other confounders). In addition, 25 non-PEARL practices were matched with PEARL practices for prior prevalent uptake and number of invitees.ResultsTwenty-five practices agreed to participate. A total of 3149 GP-endorsed reminders were sent. Uptake in the PEARL practices was 54% compared with 51% in the matched-control practices. The adjusted RR for uptake was 1.08 (95% CI: 1.05, 1.11, P<0.001) for all invitees and 2.18 (1.79, 2.66, P<0.001) for invitees who had not returned a kit following the standard reminder.ConclusionsThe GP-endorsed reminder was associated with significantly increased uptake among subjects not responding to the standard reminder letter.
| S-EPMC5518858 | biostudies-literature