Still hard to know how large the benefits will really be
- Ursula Werneke, Honorary research fellow, London Health Economics Consortium.,
- Klim McPherson, Professor of public health epidemiology, Cancer and Public Health Unit.
- London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London WC1E 7HT
Papers pp 376, 388
Ever since the implementation of the NHS breast screening programme in 1988 two important questions have been consistently raised. Should the age range of women invited be extended from the current range of 50-64 years, and should the screening interval be reduced from the current three years? If we are to believe the cost effectiveness analysis by Boer et al in this week's issue (p 376),1 an increase in age to 69 and a two year interval would each generate substantial benefits in life years saved and deaths averted—but, needless to say, at a substantial cost. Moreover, the authors'conclusion that extending the age range is expected to prevent more deaths, whereas shortening the screening interval would save more life years leaves policymakers with a—not unfamiliar—ethical dilemma.
It is obviously desirable to improve life expectancy in those women already eligible for screening. Reducing the interval cancer rate, which is particularly high in the third year of …
Sign in
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record







CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mendeley
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Re: Transforming translation
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Bringing Nightingale down to size
Published 29 May 2012
Re: Avoid antimuscarinic drugs in people with dementia
Published 29 May 2012
Re: Strengthening primary health care: Related to the integration of medical training, community service need and health administration
Published 29 May 2012
Re: Strengthening primary health care: Related to the integration of medical training, community service need and health administration
Published 29 May 2012
Most responses
Venous thrombosis in users of non-oral hormonal contraception: follow-up study, Denmark 2001-10 (12 responses)
Published 10 May 2012 - 23:32
The psychiatric oligarchs who medicalise normality (9 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 15:42
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? No (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? Yes (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
The hardest thing: admitting error (7 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 12:27