Abstract
[Extract]
Screening requires that people with no symptoms undergo testing to find out
whether they have occult disease. Therefore, there is a strong ethical imperative
to ensure that high-quality evidence is available from randomized trials and that
screening is judged to have more benefits than harms. But how should this judgment be made, and by whom?
Screening requires that people with no symptoms undergo testing to find out
whether they have occult disease. Therefore, there is a strong ethical imperative
to ensure that high-quality evidence is available from randomized trials and that
screening is judged to have more benefits than harms. But how should this judgment be made, and by whom?
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 47-50 |
| Number of pages | 4 |
| Journal | Effective clinical practice : ECP |
| Volume | 3 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Publication status | Published - 2000 |
| Externally published | Yes |