FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2183190612> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2183190612 endingPage "38" @default.
• W2183190612 startingPage "22" @default.
• W2183190612 abstract "A review of the published evidence presented here argues that screening for melanoma is recommended and practised at present, but with wide diversity of opinions about its value; there is evidence that screening has considerable potential for benefit, but the evidence of actual benefit is limited; and there are substantial costs and potential hazards from screening. On this basis the evaluation of screening procedures for melanoma is important, and options for this are discussed. The ideal study design to assess the efficacy of melanoma screening in reducing mortality is a large scale randomised trial. This may need a well coordinated proposal involving several centres in one or more countries, and the cost would be substantial. Without such a trial, however, it is most likely that increasing resources will be put into poorly designed screening programmes of unknown value. The simplest and strongest designs use individual randomisation, but group randomisation designs may have practical advantages, though they require a greater sample size. Designs based on general population screening, and on screening only high risk groups, are both considered. They answer different questions. In countries with high incidence the value of general population screening is probably the more critical. Not enough is known to specify the type and frequency of screening precisely; both screening by doctors and self screening require evaluation, and annual screening should probably be tested. The age range at risk will depend on the local incidence, but is likely to be quite wide-for example, 45-69, and both sexes need inclusion. Thus a suggested design for a moderate to high incidence area would be a trial, randomised by individual or group, assessing at least two annual rounds of both screening by doctor and self screening (ideally by a factorial design), for adults aged 45-69, with mortality over several years' follow up as the critical outcome. In an area with good data systems such a study could compare screening offered to some 260,000 subjects with 10 times that number of controls passively followed up, with 90% power to detect a one third reduction in mortality. A general assessment of costs over five years gave estimates of $8.3 million for the screening programme and $2.4 million for the evaluation. The much weaker designs, area based cohort studies using individual data or a simpler ecological comparison, and case-control studies, are also considered. If well designed with attention to their methodological limitations they may be valuable but are unlikely to be as definitive as a randomised trial." @default.
• W2183190612 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2183190612 creator A5061097385 @default.
• W2183190612 date "1994-01-01" @default.
• W2183190612 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W2183190612 title "Screening for Melanoma and Options For-Its Evaluation" @default.
• W2183190612 cites W122317830 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W1484728498 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W1492182164 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W1523928662 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W1553956304 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W180887037 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W1963647352 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W1965329785 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W1992445489 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W1992523805 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W1999985524 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2001963085 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2002393260 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2003312762 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2011172436 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2014495259 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2015800167 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2018314653 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2020870221 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2020983166 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2029039631 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2031680525 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2031952142 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2053319808 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2056423306 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2058134455 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2058153856 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2060284009 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2063755709 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2065216035 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2065358909 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2065455596 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2066315356 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2075083994 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2076517928 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2081230309 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2090749339 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2090815382 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2092910926 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2094282166 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2101907625 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2140959850 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2144037244 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2145630017 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2148170358 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2152950860 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2279708364 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2309426402 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2339875145 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2398708488 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2403377235 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2404796766 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2444282067 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W2473960329 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W4210742152 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W4232571454 @default.
• W2183190612 cites W4248156216 @default.
• W2183190612 doi "https://doi.org/10.1177/096914139400100107" @default.
• W2183190612 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8790483" @default.
• W2183190612 hasPublicationYear "1994" @default.
• W2183190612 type Work @default.
• W2183190612 sameAs 2183190612 @default.
• W2183190612 citedByCount "63" @default.
• W2183190612 countsByYear W21831906122013 @default.
• W2183190612 countsByYear W21831906122017 @default.
• W2183190612 countsByYear W21831906122018 @default.
• W2183190612 countsByYear W21831906122020 @default.
• W2183190612 countsByYear W21831906122022 @default.
• W2183190612 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2183190612 hasAuthorship W2183190612A5061097385 @default.
• W2183190612 hasBestOaLocation W21831906121 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConcept C105795698 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConcept C120665830 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConcept C162118730 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConcept C2776291640 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConcept C2908647359 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConcept C512399662 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConcept C61511704 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConcept C99454951 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConceptScore W2183190612C105795698 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConceptScore W2183190612C120665830 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConceptScore W2183190612C121332964 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConceptScore W2183190612C144133560 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConceptScore W2183190612C162118730 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConceptScore W2183190612C2776291640 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConceptScore W2183190612C2908647359 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConceptScore W2183190612C33923547 @default.
• W2183190612 hasConceptScore W2183190612C512399662 @default.

• next