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

Learn More →

Overdiagnostic uncertainty

Overdiagnostic uncertainty Eur J Epidemiol (2017) 32:533–534 DOI 10.1007/s10654-017-0260-0 CORRESPONDENCE 1,2 Bjørn Hofmann Received: 10 May 2017 / Accepted: 16 May 2017 / Published online: 22 May 2017 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017 There is an intriguing international debate on overdiagnosis. avoid harmful health services and to improve the quality of Alongside with the vast and vivid disputes on the extension care. One reason why the philosophical debate has not yet of overdiagnosis in epidemiology, there are heated philo- provided epidemiology with viable solutions may be the sophical debates on how to define overdiagnosis. The latter complexity of the issue. In particular, it may be that we have debates try to clarify the concept of overdiagnosis so that not paid sufficient attention to the different types of uncer- consensual estimates can be obtained [1], crucial factors tainty at play. In diagnostics the main question is whether the generating overdiagnosis can be identified, and finally, that test is accurate, i.e., whether the test result is correct.In appropriate measures to bar overdiagnosis can be found. overdiagnosis, on the other hand, the question is whether the Despite great progress in the philosophical debate, there (correct) test actually matters to the person. In medicaliza- is http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png European Journal of Epidemiology Springer Journals

Overdiagnostic uncertainty

European Journal of Epidemiology , Volume 32 (6) – May 22, 2017

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/overdiagnostic-uncertainty-W9t0XNyc77

References (10)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 by Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
Subject
Medicine & Public Health; Epidemiology; Public Health; Infectious Diseases; Cardiology; Oncology
ISSN
0393-2990
eISSN
1573-7284
DOI
10.1007/s10654-017-0260-0
pmid
28534227
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Eur J Epidemiol (2017) 32:533–534 DOI 10.1007/s10654-017-0260-0 CORRESPONDENCE 1,2 Bjørn Hofmann Received: 10 May 2017 / Accepted: 16 May 2017 / Published online: 22 May 2017 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017 There is an intriguing international debate on overdiagnosis. avoid harmful health services and to improve the quality of Alongside with the vast and vivid disputes on the extension care. One reason why the philosophical debate has not yet of overdiagnosis in epidemiology, there are heated philo- provided epidemiology with viable solutions may be the sophical debates on how to define overdiagnosis. The latter complexity of the issue. In particular, it may be that we have debates try to clarify the concept of overdiagnosis so that not paid sufficient attention to the different types of uncer- consensual estimates can be obtained [1], crucial factors tainty at play. In diagnostics the main question is whether the generating overdiagnosis can be identified, and finally, that test is accurate, i.e., whether the test result is correct.In appropriate measures to bar overdiagnosis can be found. overdiagnosis, on the other hand, the question is whether the Despite great progress in the philosophical debate, there (correct) test actually matters to the person. In medicaliza- is

Journal

European Journal of EpidemiologySpringer Journals

Published: May 22, 2017

There are no references for this article.