Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2008;336:480-483 (1 March), doi:10.1136/bmj.39470.643218.94
J A M Gray, director1, J Patnick, director 2, R G Blanks, epidemiologist 3
1 National Knowledge Service, Oxford OX3 7LG, 2 NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, Sheffield, 3 Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey
Correspondence to: J A M Gray muir.gray@medknox.net
Gordon Brown has pledged to increase screening services in the NHS. Muir Gray, Julietta Patnick, and Roger Blanks show how experience with the UK breast screening programme can help ensure that they are effective
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
All screening programmes do harm; some do good as well, and, of these, some do more good than harm at reasonable cost. The first task of any public health service is to identify beneficial programmes by appraising the evidence. However, evidence of a favourable balance of benefit to harm in a research setting does not guarantee that a similar balance will be reproduced in practice, so screening programmes need to be introduced in a way that allows their quality to be measured and continuously improved.
The decision to implement a breast cancer screening programme in the United Kingdom in 1987 was based on evidence of efficacy from other countries, especially Sweden. The Department of Health set up a committee to review the evidence, chaired by Pat Forrest, a leading researcher in treating and screening for breast cancer. His committees analysis of evidence and recommendations1 has been criticised,2 but the government
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati What's this?
Read all Rapid Responses