Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Flexible Sigmoidoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening

Flexible Sigmoidoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening Opinion Editorials represent the opinions of the authors and JAMA EDITORIAL and not those of the American Medical Association. More Evidence, Persistent Ironies Allan S. Brett, MD In this issue of JAMA, Holme and colleagues report results of ample, in managed care organizations that actively promote a large randomized trial of colorectal cancer screening in Nor- it to their enrollees and in uninsured or underinsured popu- way in which one-time flexible sigmoidoscopy was com- lations without affordable access to colonoscopy. The transi- pared with no screening. In tion to screening colonoscopy among average-risk persons in intention-to-screen analysis— the United States accelerated in 2001, when Medicare began which included all people in- paying for it and many private insurers followed. Gastroen- Related article page 606 vited for screening, regard- terologists began to recommend colonoscopy as the test of less of their follow-through—relative reductions in colorectal choice and had economic incentives to do so. As one gastro- cancer incidence and cancer-specific mortality were 20% and enterologist observed recently, “Colonoscopy has been really 27% in the sigmoidoscopy group, respectively, compared with good to our specialty. It is the goose that has laid the golden the no-screening control group, during an average follow-up http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png JAMA American Medical Association

Flexible Sigmoidoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening

JAMA , Volume 312 (6) – Aug 13, 2014

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/flexible-sigmoidoscopy-for-colorectal-cancer-screening-kLp6NaY7iy
Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright 2014 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved. Applicable FARS/DFARS Restrictions Apply to Government Use.
ISSN
0098-7484
eISSN
1538-3598
DOI
10.1001/jama.2014.8613
pmid
25117127
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Opinion Editorials represent the opinions of the authors and JAMA EDITORIAL and not those of the American Medical Association. More Evidence, Persistent Ironies Allan S. Brett, MD In this issue of JAMA, Holme and colleagues report results of ample, in managed care organizations that actively promote a large randomized trial of colorectal cancer screening in Nor- it to their enrollees and in uninsured or underinsured popu- way in which one-time flexible sigmoidoscopy was com- lations without affordable access to colonoscopy. The transi- pared with no screening. In tion to screening colonoscopy among average-risk persons in intention-to-screen analysis— the United States accelerated in 2001, when Medicare began which included all people in- paying for it and many private insurers followed. Gastroen- Related article page 606 vited for screening, regard- terologists began to recommend colonoscopy as the test of less of their follow-through—relative reductions in colorectal choice and had economic incentives to do so. As one gastro- cancer incidence and cancer-specific mortality were 20% and enterologist observed recently, “Colonoscopy has been really 27% in the sigmoidoscopy group, respectively, compared with good to our specialty. It is the goose that has laid the golden the no-screening control group, during an average follow-up

Journal

JAMAAmerican Medical Association

Published: Aug 13, 2014

References