Response

Reading between the lines of cancer screening trials: Using modeling to understand the evidence

Ruth Etzioni, Roman Gulati

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In our article about limitations of basing screening policy on screening trials, we offered several examples of ways in which modeling, using data from large screening trials and population trends, provided insights that differed somewhat from those based only on empirical trial results. In this editorial, we take a step back and consider the general question of whether randomized screening trials provide the strongest evidence for clinical guidelines concerning population screening programs. We argue that randomized trials provide a process that is designed to protect against certain biases but that this process does not guarantee that inferences based on empirical results from screening trials will be unbiased. Appropriate quantitative methods are key to obtaining unbiased inferences from screening trials. We highlight several studies in the statistical literature demonstrating that conventional survival analyses of screening trials can be misleading and list a number of key questions concerning screening harms and benefits that cannot be answered without modeling. Although we acknowledge the centrality of screening trials in the policy process, we maintain that modeling constitutes a powerful tool for screening trial interpretation and screening policy development.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)304-306
Number of pages3
JournalMedical care
Volume51
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Early Detection of Cancer
Population Control
Policy Making
Survival Analysis
Guidelines
Population

Keywords

  • mass screening
  • policy development
  • randomized controlled trials
  • simulation modeling

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Response : Reading between the lines of cancer screening trials: Using modeling to understand the evidence. / Etzioni, Ruth; Gulati, Roman.

In: Medical care, Vol. 51, No. 4, 01.04.2013, p. 304-306.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{65ec73c596fa423da12ad2eb2efd0ab4,
title = "Response: Reading between the lines of cancer screening trials: Using modeling to understand the evidence",
abstract = "In our article about limitations of basing screening policy on screening trials, we offered several examples of ways in which modeling, using data from large screening trials and population trends, provided insights that differed somewhat from those based only on empirical trial results. In this editorial, we take a step back and consider the general question of whether randomized screening trials provide the strongest evidence for clinical guidelines concerning population screening programs. We argue that randomized trials provide a process that is designed to protect against certain biases but that this process does not guarantee that inferences based on empirical results from screening trials will be unbiased. Appropriate quantitative methods are key to obtaining unbiased inferences from screening trials. We highlight several studies in the statistical literature demonstrating that conventional survival analyses of screening trials can be misleading and list a number of key questions concerning screening harms and benefits that cannot be answered without modeling. Although we acknowledge the centrality of screening trials in the policy process, we maintain that modeling constitutes a powerful tool for screening trial interpretation and screening policy development.",
keywords = "mass screening, policy development, randomized controlled trials, simulation modeling",
author = "Ruth Etzioni and Roman Gulati",
year = "2013",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/MLR.0b013e31828a7e1a",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "51",
pages = "304--306",
journal = "Medical Care",
issn = "0025-7079",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Response

T2 - Reading between the lines of cancer screening trials: Using modeling to understand the evidence

AU - Etzioni, Ruth

AU - Gulati, Roman

PY - 2013/4/1

Y1 - 2013/4/1

N2 - In our article about limitations of basing screening policy on screening trials, we offered several examples of ways in which modeling, using data from large screening trials and population trends, provided insights that differed somewhat from those based only on empirical trial results. In this editorial, we take a step back and consider the general question of whether randomized screening trials provide the strongest evidence for clinical guidelines concerning population screening programs. We argue that randomized trials provide a process that is designed to protect against certain biases but that this process does not guarantee that inferences based on empirical results from screening trials will be unbiased. Appropriate quantitative methods are key to obtaining unbiased inferences from screening trials. We highlight several studies in the statistical literature demonstrating that conventional survival analyses of screening trials can be misleading and list a number of key questions concerning screening harms and benefits that cannot be answered without modeling. Although we acknowledge the centrality of screening trials in the policy process, we maintain that modeling constitutes a powerful tool for screening trial interpretation and screening policy development.

AB - In our article about limitations of basing screening policy on screening trials, we offered several examples of ways in which modeling, using data from large screening trials and population trends, provided insights that differed somewhat from those based only on empirical trial results. In this editorial, we take a step back and consider the general question of whether randomized screening trials provide the strongest evidence for clinical guidelines concerning population screening programs. We argue that randomized trials provide a process that is designed to protect against certain biases but that this process does not guarantee that inferences based on empirical results from screening trials will be unbiased. Appropriate quantitative methods are key to obtaining unbiased inferences from screening trials. We highlight several studies in the statistical literature demonstrating that conventional survival analyses of screening trials can be misleading and list a number of key questions concerning screening harms and benefits that cannot be answered without modeling. Although we acknowledge the centrality of screening trials in the policy process, we maintain that modeling constitutes a powerful tool for screening trial interpretation and screening policy development.

KW - mass screening

KW - policy development

KW - randomized controlled trials

KW - simulation modeling

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84875468124&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84875468124&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31828a7e1a

DO - 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31828a7e1a

M3 - Article

VL - 51

SP - 304

EP - 306

JO - Medical Care

JF - Medical Care

SN - 0025-7079

IS - 4

ER -