A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Interventions for increasing uptake in screening programmes. | LitMetric

Interventions for increasing uptake in screening programmes.

GMS Health Technol Assess

Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Abteilung Epidemiologie, Sozialmedizin und Gesundheitssystemforschung, Hannover, Deutschland.

Published: August 2006

Introduction: Opportunities for the early detection of disease are not sufficiently being taken advantage of. Specific interventions could increase the uptake of prevention programmes. A comprehensive analysis of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these interventions with reference to Germany is still needed.

Objectives: This report aimed to describe and assess interventions to increase uptake in primary and secondary prevention and to explore the assessment of their cost-effectiveness.

Methods: 29 scientific databases were systematically searched in a wide strategy. Additional references were located from bibliographies. All published systematic reviews and primary studies were assessed for inclusion without language restrictions. Teams of two reviewers identified the literature, extracted data and assessed the quality of the publications independently.

Results: Four HTA reports and 22 systematic reviews were identified for the medical evaluation covering a variety of interventions. The economic evaluation was based on two HTA-reports, one meta-analysis and 15 studies. The evidence was consistent for the effectiveness of invitations and reminders aimed at users, and for prompts aimed at health care professionals. These interventions were the most commonly analysed. (Financial) Incentives for users and professionals were identified in a small number of studies. Limited evidence was available for cost-effectiveness showing incremental costs for follow-up reminders and invitations by telephone. Evidence for ethical, social and legal aspects pointed to needs in vulnerable populations.

Discussion: The material was heterogeneous regarding interventions used, study populations and settings. The majority of references originated from the United States and focused on secondary prevention. Approaching all target groups by invitations and reminders was recommended to increase uptake in prevention programmes in general.

Conclusions: Further research should aim to focus on primary prevention. Future research should also focus on specific interventions aiming to include vulnerable target groups and individuals, who have not previously made use of opportunities for prevention.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3011350PMC

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

increase uptake
12
interventions
8
specific interventions
8
interventions increase
8
uptake prevention
8
prevention programmes
8
secondary prevention
8
systematic reviews
8
invitations reminders
8
target groups
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!