-
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd · Jun 2002
[The benefit of population screening for breast cancer; an advisory report from the Health Council of the Netherlands].
- W A van Veen and J A Knottnerus.
- wa.van.veen@gr.nl
- Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2002 Jun 1; 146 (22): 1023-6.
AbstractA recent Cochrane review does not nullify the evidence supporting the practice of mammographic population screening for breast cancer for women aged 50 years and over. Thus concludes the Health Council of the Netherlands in an advisory report to the Dutch Government. A central feature of the Cochrane review is the conclusion that breast-cancer mortality is an unreliable outcome that is biased in favour of screening. The Health Council finds this conclusion too extreme and does not support the view that breast-cancer mortality must be replaced by overall mortality as an outcome. The Health Council does agree with the view that the use of disease-specific mortality as the only endpoint renders cancer-screening trials subject to bias. Therefore, careful attention should be paid to total cancer mortality, other important causes of death, and overall mortality.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*,_underline_or**bold**. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>and subscript<sub>text</sub>. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3., hyphens-or asterisks*. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com) - Images can be included with:
 - For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote..