Cited by 38Global Cancer Incidence and ScreeningWomen's cancer prevention and managementColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection

Screening for Cancer: Considerations for Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Sullivan, Terrence, Sullivan, Richard, Ginsburg, Ophira M.·2015·Disease Control Priorities, Third Edition (Volume 3): Cancer

Abstract

Explains that a cancer screening program should consider the burden of the cancer in the population at risk, cost-effectiveness, and the success in how well the test works. Key terms defined include opportunistic screening, organized screening, population-based screening, high-risk screening, and several types of bias (lead-time bias, length bias, and overdiagnosis). Ethical and cost-effectiveness considerations determine that benefits outweigh possible harms. Three cancers discussed more fully are (1) breast cancer for which several approaches to screening are analyzed; (2) cervical cancer which may have the greatest potential for screening-detected reductions in cancer mortality; and (3) colorectal cancer which becomes more common as less developed countries adopt Western lifestyles. A diagonal approach to screening involves an umbrella of maternal or reproductive health policy to encompass both cervical and breast cancer and creates a platform onto which other preventive and wellness care can be added. Developing a screening policy for cancer examines choice of diagnostic technologies and follow-up interventions, the age groups targeted, referral and enrollment strategies, and quality assurance processes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1596/978-1-4648-0349-9_ch12

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Colorectal cancer screening with noninvasive procedures, such as the fecal immunochemical test, may be cost-effective in many transitioning regions given its high specificity, good sensitivity, and ease of use.

    “there is increasing evidence that colorectal cancer screening with noninvasive procedures, such as the fecal immunochemical test, given its high specificity, good sensitivity, and ease of use, may be cost-effective in many transitioning regions.[67][68][69]”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sullivan, T., Sullivan, R., & Ginsburg, O. M.
Affiliations
University of Toronto (CA)
Venue
Disease Control Priorities, Third Edition (Volume 3): Cancer
Published
2015-11
Pages
211-222
OpenAlex
W2410823298
Cited by
38
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2
FWCI
3.99
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
World Bank, Washington, DC eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Keywords
cancer screening, low- and middle-income countries, cost-effectiveness, lead-time bias, length bias, overdiagnosis, breast cancer screening, cervical cancer screening, colorectal cancer screening, opportunistic screening, organized screening programs, mass screening, high-risk screening, screening policy, cancer mortality reduction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review