Unknown

Dataset Information

0

Overdiagnosis across medical disciplines: a scoping review.


ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To provide insight into how and in what clinical fields overdiagnosis is studied and give directions for further applied and methodological research. DESIGN:Scoping review. DATA SOURCES:Medline up to August 2017. STUDY SELECTION:All English studies on humans, in which overdiagnosis was discussed as a dominant theme. DATA EXTRACTION:Studies were assessed on clinical field, study aim (ie, methodological or non-methodological), article type (eg, primary study, review), the type and role of diagnostic test(s) studied and the context in which these studies discussed overdiagnosis. RESULTS:From 4896 studies, 1851 were included for analysis. Half of all studies on overdiagnosis were performed in the field of oncology (50%). Other prevalent clinical fields included mental disorders, infectious diseases and cardiovascular diseases accounting for 9%, 8% and 6% of studies, respectively. Overdiagnosis was addressed from a methodological perspective in 20% of studies. Primary studies were the most common article type (58%). The type of diagnostic tests most commonly studied were imaging tests (32%), although these were predominantly seen in oncology and cardiovascular disease (84%). Diagnostic tests were studied in a screening setting in 43% of all studies, but as high as 75% of all oncological studies. The context in which studies addressed overdiagnosis related most frequently to its estimation, accounting for 53%. Methodology on overdiagnosis estimation and definition provided a source for extensive discussion. Other contexts of discussion included definition of disease, overdiagnosis communication, trends in increasing disease prevalence, drivers and consequences of overdiagnosis, incidental findings and genomics. CONCLUSIONS:Overdiagnosis is discussed across virtually all clinical fields and in different contexts. The variability in characteristics between studies and lack of consensus on overdiagnosis definition indicate the need for a uniform typology to improve coherence and comparability of studies on overdiagnosis.

SUBMITTER: Jenniskens K 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5770894 | biostudies-other | 2017 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

altmetric image

Publications

Overdiagnosis across medical disciplines: a scoping review.

Jenniskens Kevin K   de Groot Joris A H JAH   Reitsma Johannes B JB   Moons Karel G M KGM   Hooft Lotty L   Naaktgeboren Christiana A CA  

BMJ open 20171227 12


<h4>Objective</h4>To provide insight into how and in what clinical fields overdiagnosis is studied and give directions for further applied and methodological research.<h4>Design</h4>Scoping review.<h4>Data sources</h4>Medline up to August 2017.<h4>Study selection</h4>All English studies on humans, in which overdiagnosis was discussed as a dominant theme.<h4>Data extraction</h4>Studies were assessed on clinical field, study aim (ie, methodological or non-methodological), article type (eg, primary  ...[more]

Similar Datasets

| S-EPMC8247025 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7519432 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC5915670 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7574565 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC5938158 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7809831 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC8131083 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC8339984 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6235351 | biostudies-other