Screening For Disease

Screening for Disease

Although abounding individuals and organizations may endorse the ambition of screening programs, the capacity and accomplishing are generally controversial. For some types of screening, it can be absolutely arduous to counterbalance the animal and bread-and-butter costs and allowances and actuate a bright recommendation. For instance, in an commodity in the New England Journal of Medicine, Dr. Michael Barry (2009) indicates that “serial PSA [prostate-specific–antigen] screening has at best a bashful aftereffect on prostate-cancer bloodshed during the aboriginal decade of follow-up. This account comes at the amount of abundant over-diagnosis and overtreatment. It is important to bethink that the key catechism is not whether PSA screening is able but whether it does added acceptable than harm.”

This week’s Learning Assets accommodate accessories about screening programs for four altered diseases that accommodate potentially arguable recommendations. For this Discussion, you will baddest a ache and appraise the epidemiological affirmation to appraise a advocacy for screening guidelines. In addition, you will accede possibilities for furthering action to advance citizenry bloom accompanying to this disease.

To prepare:

  • Review      the four accessories anxious with screening and accessible action listed in      this week’s Learning Resources. All four accessories accommodate potentially      controversial recommendations for screening and blockage (See absorbed      files for these articles).
  • Select      one commodity on which to focus for this Discussion.
  • Analyze      how the epidemiologic abstracts could be acclimated to codify action for convalescent      population health.

By tomorrow 04/17/2018 3pm, address a minimum of 550 words in APA architecture with at atomic 3 bookish references from the account of appropriate readings below. Accommodate the akin one headings as numbered below:

Post a adamant bookish acknowledgment that addresses the following:

1) Abridge the recommendations of your called article. Discuss ethical considerations and whether or not you accept the recommendations are justified.

2) Describe the epidemiological affirmation in abutment of your position.

3) Identify whether the screening affairs you assay is population-based or high-risk based and how that influences your assessment.

4) How can the appear abstracts be acclimated to move action advanced for convalescent citizenry bloom about this issue?

Required Readings

Friis, R. H., & Sellers, T. A. (2014). Epidemiology for accessible bloom convenance (5th ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett.

Chapter 10, “Data Interpretation Issues”

Chapter 11, “Screening for Ache in the Community”

Chapter 11 examines aspects of screening for disease, including characteristics of a acceptable screening assay and how screening programs can be evaluated.

Nash, D. B., Fabius, R. J., Skoufalos, A., Clarke, J. L. & Horowitz, M. R. (2016). Citizenry health: Creating a ability of wellness (2nd ed). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Chapter 13, “Decision Support”

This affiliate addresses altitude and assay accoutrement acclimated to abutment accommodation authoritative for improvement, accountability, and analysis accompanying to citizenry health. The three capital purposes of altitude in citizenry bloom (improvement, accountability, research) accommodate the framework for this chapter.

Note: You will charge to assay the afterward four accessories to complete this week’s Discussion: (See absorbed book for the articles)

U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. (2009). Screening for breast cancer. Retrieved from http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/uspsbrca.htm (See absorbed File).

This is a arbitrary of the arguable USPSTF angle apropos screening for breast blight application mammography and breast self-examination. It includes the recommendations, rationale, and affirmation acknowledging the proposal.

Alvarez, G. G., Gushulak, B., Rumman, K. A., Altpeter, E., Chemtob, D., Douglas, P., … & Ellis, E. (2011). A allusive assay of tuberculosis clearing medical screening programs from called countries with aerial clearing and low tuberculosis accident rates. BMC Accessible Health, 11(3). Retrieved from http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/11/3 (See absorbed File).

This commodity examines tuberculosis screening practices amid migrants from high-incidence countries to low-incidence countries. Accede the allowances and challenges of standardizing screening requirements at the all-around level.

Creighton, P., Lew, J.-B., Clements, M., Smith, M., Howard, K., Dyer, S., Lord, S., & Canfell, K. (2010). Cervical blight screening in Australia: Modelled appraisal of the appulse of alteration the recommended breach from two to three years. BMC Accessible Health, 10, 734–747 (See absorbed File).

This commodity examines the amount allowances and bloom after-effects of screening for cervical blight every 3 years as against to every 2 years. Researchers abridge alternative studies that abutment this change as well.

Hugosson, J., Carlsson, S., Aus, G., Bergdahl, S., Khatami, A., Lodding, P., & … Lilja, H. (2010). Bloodshed after-effects from the Göteborg randomised population-based prostate-cancer screening trial. Lancet Oncology, 11(8), 725–732 (See absorbed File).

Prostate blight screening can aftereffect in the apprehension of alternative cancers that may “never present during the patient’s lifetime (over-diagnosis) and it after-effects in accidental treatments that can accident men’s affection of activity (over-treatment).” However, this analysis abstraction additionally demonstrates how prostate blight screening additionally can reduces bloodshed ante in some instances.

HealthMap. (2007). Retrieved from http://www.healthmap.org/en

This website tracks, maps, and describes accepted ache outbreaks about the world, forth with sources of advice about them. It provides a admired account of all-around accessible bloom issues.

Association for Community Bloom Improvement. (2006). Planning, assessment, outcomes & appraisal resources. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20130709124030/http://www.communityhlth.org/communityhlth/resources/planning.html

Required Media

Laureate Education (Producer). (2012). Epidemiology and citizenry health: Screening [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Note: The almost breadth of this media allotment is 8 minutes.

In this week’s program, Dr. LaPorte discusses screening as it relates to epidemiology.

Optional Resources

Fields, M. M., & Chevlen, E. (2006). Screening for disease: Authoritative evidence-based choices. Clinical Journal of Oncology Nursing, 10(1), 73–76.

Strong, K., Wald, N., Miller, A., & Alwan, A. (2005). Accepted concepts in screening for noncommunicable disease: Apple Bloom Organization Consultation Group Report on alignment of noncommunicable ache screening. Journal of Medical Screening, 12(1), 12–19.

Order a unique copy of this paper

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
Top Academic Writers Ready to Help
with Your Research Proposal
Order now and a get a 25% discount with the discount code: COURSEGUYOrder Now!
+ +