<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" > <channel><title>Comments on: How does cancer screening cause harm?</title> <atom:link href="http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/04/how-does-cancer-screening-cause-harm.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/04/how-does-cancer-screening-cause-harm.html</link> <description></description> <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 23:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" /> <item><title>By: Diora</title><link>http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/04/how-does-cancer-screening-cause-harm.html#comment-73596</link> <dc:creator>Diora</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2007 17:01:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/04/how-does-cancer-screening-cause-harm.html#comment-73596</guid> <description>Even when we talk about screening that has been shown to save lives, the discussion of potential harms is important. &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;While the magnitude of mortality reduction benefit (and this is desease-specific mortality, by the way, not all-cause mortality) seems large when one looks at population, the probability of an individual benefitting is often small. For come individuals, maybe even for majority, these small numbers may be enough to overlook potential harm of false positives and overdiagnosis. For others, 1/500 chance in 10 years (for example) of benefit, may just not be worth the risks.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Even when we talk about screening that has been shown to save lives, the discussion of potential harms is important.</p><p>While the magnitude of mortality reduction benefit (and this is desease-specific mortality, by the way, not all-cause mortality) seems large when one looks at population, the probability of an individual benefitting is often small. For come individuals, maybe even for majority, these small numbers may be enough to overlook potential harm of false positives and overdiagnosis. For others, 1/500 chance in 10 years (for example) of benefit, may just not be worth the risks.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: DrGwenn</title><link>http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/04/how-does-cancer-screening-cause-harm.html#comment-73595</link> <dc:creator>DrGwenn</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2007 16:36:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/04/how-does-cancer-screening-cause-harm.html#comment-73595</guid> <description>Excellent point! EBM is a wonderful roadmap for clinical work but often fails to include the real world that people face. That is the crux of all these discussions on screening over the past week.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent point! EBM is a wonderful roadmap for clinical work but often fails to include the real world that people face. That is the crux of all these discussions on screening over the past week.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Domenico Savatta, M.D.</title><link>http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/04/how-does-cancer-screening-cause-harm.html#comment-73593</link> <dc:creator>Domenico Savatta, M.D.</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2007 15:07:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/04/how-does-cancer-screening-cause-harm.html#comment-73593</guid> <description>Kevin,&lt;br/&gt;One thing that is often overlooked is the psychological impact of screening.  &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;This is rarely discussed in studies, but patients who may have a problem get extremely worried.  Also there is stress associated with having a test and awaiting the results.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;I blogged on one study that concluded that men that had a negative prostate biopsy had a worse quality of life conpared to men that did not have a prostate biopsy:&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;http://www.njurology.com/RoboticSurgeryBlog/2007/03/quality_of_life_after_a_negati.php</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kevin,<br />One thing that is often overlooked is the psychological impact of screening.</p><p>This is rarely discussed in studies, but patients who may have a problem get extremely worried.  Also there is stress associated with having a test and awaiting the results.</p><p>I blogged on one study that concluded that men that had a negative prostate biopsy had a worse quality of life conpared to men that did not have a prostate biopsy:</p><p><a href="http://www.njurology.com/RoboticSurgeryBlog/2007/03/quality_of_life_after_a_negati.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.njurology.com/RoboticSurgeryBlog/2007/03/quality_of_life_after_a_negati.php</a></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using apc
Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching 2/6 queries in 0.003 seconds using memcached
Object Caching 363/367 objects using apc
Content Delivery Network via cdn.kevinmd.com

Served from: www.kevinmd.com @ 2012-02-14 18:48:18 -->
