LEADING ARTICLE

Screening

Newborn and childhood screening programmes: criteria, evidence, and current policy

D A C Elliman¹, C Dezateux², H E Bedford²

¹ Department of Child Health, St George's Hospital, Tooting, London SW17 OQT, UK
² Centre for Paediatric Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Child Health, 30 Guilford Street, London WC1 1EH, UK

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Dr D A C Elliman, Department of Child Health, St George's Hospital, Tooting, London SW17 OQT, UK;
DavidElliman@compuserve.com

Accepted 5 April 2002

---

"The systematic application of a test or enquiry, to identify individuals at sufficient risk to benefit from further investigation or direct preventive action, amongst persons who have not sought medical attention on account of symptoms of that disorder" (Wald¹)

---

Keywords: screening; phenylketonuria; hypothyroidism; cystic fibrosis; muscular dystrophy; growth

Abbreviations: ANSG, Antenatal Subgroup; CHSG, Child Health Subgroup; DDH, developmental dysplasia of the hip; IDT, infant distraction test; MCADD, medium chain acyl CoA dehydrogenase deficiency; MS/MS, tandem mass spectrometry; NHS, National Health Service; NSC, National Screening Committee

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Screening is offered to apparently well individuals to identify those at high risk of a specific condition, for whom early treatment, more effective treatment, or information may be offered in order to improve health outcome or to provide opportunities for informed decision making. By definition, screening tests are not diagnostic tests and therefore cannot separate reliably those with a specific condition from those without. Hence, those with a negative screening result will include some affected individuals, usually referred to as "false negatives", who may be falsely reassured by the screening result. Conversely, those with a positive screening result will include unaffected individuals, usually referred to as "false positives", who may be worried unnecessarily or be exposed to the risks of subsequent diagnostic tests. Therefore the threshold for a positive test will be determined by balancing the goals of screening and the perceived disbenefits of missing affected individuals or falsely . . . [Full text of this article]

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Koopmans, J., Ross, L. F. (2006). Does Familiarity Breed Acceptance? The Influence of Policy on Physicians' Attitudes Toward Newborn Screening Programs. Pediatrics 117: 1477-1485 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Botkin, J. R., Clayton, E. W., Fost, N. C., Burke, W., Murray, T. H., Baily, M. A., Wilfond, B., Berg, A., Ross, L. F. (2006). Newborn Screening Technology: Proceed With Caution. Pediatrics 117: 1793-1799 [Full Text]  
• Gray, A., Elbourne, D., Dezateux, C., King, A., Quinn, A., Gardner, F., on Behalf of the United Kingdom Collaborative Hip, (2005). Economic Evaluation of Ultrasonography in the Diagnosis and Management of Developmental Hip Dysplasia in the United Kingdom and Ireland. JBJS 87: 2472-2479 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Botkin, J. R. (2005). Research for Newborn Screening: Developing a National Framework. Pediatrics 116: 862-871 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Hall, D, Wilkinson, A R (2005). Quality of care by neonatal nurse practitioners: a review of the Ashington experiment. Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 90: F195-F200 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Elbourne, D, Dezateux, C (2005). Hip dysplasia and ultrasound imaging of whole populations: the precautionary principle revisited. Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 90: F2-F3 [Full Text]  
• Parsons, E P, Bradley, D M, Clarke, A J (2003). Newborn screening for Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Arch. Dis. Child. 88: 91-92 [Full Text]  

eLetters:

Read all eLetters

Newborn screening for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy

EP Parsons, et al.

ADC Online, 6 Aug 2002 [Full text]