Search

Background: Guidelines recommend shared decision-making (SDM) around mammography screening for women ≥ 75 years old., Objective: To use microsimulation modeling to estimate the lifetime benefits and harms of screening women aged 75, 80, and 85 years based on their individual risk factors (family history, breast density, prior biopsy) and comorbidity level to support SDM in clinical practice., Design, Setting, and Participants: We adapted two established Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models to evaluate the remaining lifetime benefits and harms of screening U.S. women born in 1940, at decision ages 75, 80, and 85 years considering their individual risk factors and comorbidity levels. Results were summarized for average- and higher-risk women (defined as having breast cancer family history, heterogeneously dense breasts, and no prior biopsy, 5% of the population)., Main Outcomes and Measures: Remaining lifetime breast cancers detected, deaths (breast cancer/other causes), false positives, and overdiagnoses for average- and higher-risk women by age and comorbidity level for screening (one or five screens) vs. no screening per 1000 women., Results: Compared to stopping, one additional screen at 75 years old resulted in six and eight more breast cancers detected (10% overdiagnoses), one and two fewer breast cancer deaths, and 52 and 59 false positives per 1000 average- and higher-risk women without comorbidities, respectively. Five additional screens over 10 years led to 23 and 31 additional breast cancer cases (29-31% overdiagnoses), four and 15 breast cancer deaths avoided, and 238 and 268 false positives per 1000 average- and higher-risk screened women without comorbidities, respectively. Screening women at older ages (80 and 85 years old) and high comorbidity levels led to fewer breast cancer deaths and a higher percentage of overdiagnoses., Conclusions: Simulation models show that continuing screening in women ≥ 75 years old results in fewer breast cancer deaths but more false positive tests and overdiagnoses. Together, clinicians and 75 + women may use model output to weigh the benefits and harms of continued screening., (© 2023. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Background: There is little evidence on the balance between potential benefits and harms of mammography screening in women 75 years and older. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesise the evidence on the outcomes of mammography screening in women aged 75 years and older., Methods: A systematic review of mammography screening studies in women aged 75 years and over., Results: Thirty-six studies were included in this review: 27 observational studies and 9 modelling studies. Many of the included studies used no or uninformative comparison groups resulting in a potential bias towards the benefits of screening. Despite this, there was mixed evidence about the benefits and harms of continuing mammography screening beyond the age of 75 years. Some studies showed a beneficial effect on breast cancer mortality, and other studies showed no effect on mortality. Some studies showed some harms (false positive tests and recalls) being comparable to those in younger age-groups, with other studies showing increase in false positive screens and biopsies in older age-group. Although reported in fewer studies, there was consistent evidence of increased overdiagnosis in older age-groups., Conclusion: There is limited evidence available to make a recommendation for/against continuing breast screening beyond the age of 75 years. Future studies should use more informative comparisons and should estimate overdiagnosis given potentially substantial harm in this age-group due to competing causes of death. This review was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020203131)., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Regular physical activity provides significant health benefits and reduces the risk of premature death from any cause, including cardiovascular diseases (CVD). However, physical activity may provoke sudden cardiac death (SCD), especially in presence of unrecognized diseases. It is essential to identify risk factors that contribute to SCD in athletes and to implement effective prevention of such episodes. For this purpose, SCD registries are being created, medical terminology is being unified, and schedules of medical examination are being developed. The best strategy to combat SCD during sport activities is a combination of primary prevention by screening examination to identify athletes with CVD at risk and a proper planning of first aid measures during sports events, including the availability of an automatic external defibrillator on site.

Background: Lung cancer screening (LCS) using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) reduces lung cancer mortality but can lead to downstream procedures, complications, and other potential harms. Estimates of these events outside NLST (National Lung Screening Trial) have been variable and lacked evaluation by screening result, which allows more direct comparison with trials., Objective: To identify rates of downstream procedures and complications associated with LCS., Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: 5 U.S. health care systems., Patients: Individuals who completed a baseline LDCT scan for LCS between 2014 and 2018., Measurements: Outcomes included downstream imaging, invasive diagnostic procedures, and procedural complications. For each, absolute rates were calculated overall and stratified by screening result and by lung cancer detection, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated., Results: Among the 9266 screened patients, 1472 (15.9%) had a baseline LDCT scan showing abnormalities, of whom 140 (9.5%) were diagnosed with lung cancer within 12 months (positive predictive value, 9.5% [95% CI, 8.0% to 11.0%]; negative predictive value, 99.8% [CI, 99.7% to 99.9%]; sensitivity, 92.7% [CI, 88.6% to 96.9%]; specificity, 84.4% [CI, 83.7% to 85.2%]). Absolute rates of downstream imaging and invasive procedures in screened patients were 31.9% and 2.8%, respectively. In patients undergoing invasive procedures after abnormal findings, complication rates were substantially higher than those in NLST (30.6% vs. 17.7% for any complication; 20.6% vs. 9.4% for major complications)., Limitation: Assessment of outcomes was retrospective and was based on procedural coding., Conclusion: The results indicate substantially higher rates of downstream procedures and complications associated with LCS in practice than observed in NLST. Diagnostic management likely needs to be assessed and improved to ensure that screening benefits outweigh potential harms., Primary Funding Source: National Cancer Institute and Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation., Competing Interests: Disclosures: Disclosures can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=M23-0653.

Importance: Oral health is fundamental to health and well-being across the life span. Dental caries (cavities) and periodontal disease (gum disease) are common and often untreated oral health conditions that affect eating, speaking, learning, smiling, and employment potential. Untreated oral health conditions can lead to tooth loss, irreversible tooth damage, and other serious adverse health outcomes., Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate screening and preventive interventions for oral health conditions in adults., Population: Asymptomatic adults 18 years or older., Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for oral health conditions (eg, dental caries or periodontal disease) performed by primary care clinicians in asymptomatic adults. The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of preventive interventions for oral health conditions (eg, dental caries or periodontal disease) performed by primary care clinicians in asymptomatic adults., Recommendations: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of routine screening performed by primary care clinicians for oral health conditions, including dental caries or periodontal-related disease, in adults. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of preventive interventions performed by primary care clinicians for oral health conditions, including dental caries or periodontal-related disease, in adults. (I statement).

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among U.S. women and its incidence increases with age. Endogenous estrogen exposure, proliferative benign breast disease, breast density, and family history may also indicate increased risk for breast cancer. Early detection with screening mammography reduces breast cancer mortality, but the net benefits vary by age. Assessing a patient's individual breast cancer risk can guide decisions regarding breast cancer screening. All women benefit from healthy behaviors which may reduce breast cancer risk. Some women at increased risk for breast cancer may benefit from risk-reducing medications. Use of screening measures remains suboptimal, especially for uninsured women., Competing Interests: Disclosures: All relevant financial relationships have been mitigated. Disclosures can also be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=M22-2743.

Introduction: Hypertension (HTN), also known as high blood pressure (BP), is a major global risk factor for cardiovascular and kidney diseases. Although annual BP screenings for children over three years of age are recommended, underdiagnosis of HTN in children is common. To address this issue, the American Academy of Pediatrics updated its guideline for screening and managing high BP in children in 2017, which can be cumbersome to implement in clinical practice due to the numerous cut-off points and tables. The purpose of our study is to design formulas to detect HTN in children based on the new Clinical Practice Guideline for screening and management of high BP in children and adolescents., Methods: In this research, we analyzed forty-eight cut-off points using the 90th percentile systolic and diastolic BPs for the fifth percentile height. The final mathematical model consisted of four formulas based on different ages and sex which in turn were rounded by 0.1 and 1.0 for both systolic and diastolic BPs. The formulas were further modified to be lower than the 95th percentile systolic BPs for the fifth percentile of height to minimize false negative results., Results: As evidenced by the tables included in this paper, except for a few exceptions, all rounded systolic and diastolic values for both sexes were equal to or lower than the 90th percentile. In a few cases where the cutoff points calculated by the formula were higher than the ones provided in the 2017 guideline, the differences were less than 2 mmHg., Conclusion: In this study to address the complexity of the routine guidelines, we present simplified formulas for screening children aged 1 to 12 years in figures and tables and recommend their use, particularly in office and emergency settings, as an easier-to-implement first step in screening for HTN in children.  DOI: 10.52547/ijkd.7525.

Objective: We aimed to determine the epidemiological characteristics of asymptomatic AF in elder community population (≥65 years old) to analyze the detection rate of different screening methods. Methods: The study was a prospective cohort study. The elder (≥65 years old) residents who voluntarily participated in free physical examination in Dalian community were selected. The participants were randomly divided into screening group (including intensive screening group and single screening group) and control group. The control group received interrogation, medical history collection and routine 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) examination. Screening group received an additional single-lead ambulatory ECG equipment worn for 5-7 days. Intensive screening group received two equal-length wearings in 2020 and 2021 respectively, while one screening group only wore once in 2020. Results: Finally 3 340 residents ((70.7±5.0) years old) which consisted of 1 488 males (44.55%) were enrolled. There were 1 945 residents in screening group, including 859 in intensive screening group and 1 086 in one-time screening group. The control group included 1 395 people. Detection rate of asymptomatic AF was significantly higher in screening group than control group (79(4.06%) vs. 24(1.72%), P< 0.001). Higher detection rate was found in screening group than control group in AF risk factors (1 or 2-3) subgroups and CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score (2-3 or≥4) subgroups ( P <0.05). Additionally, no difference was found between intensive screening group and single screening group (42(4.89%) vs. 37(3.41%), P =0.100). Intensive screening increased detection rate (7(6.93%) vs. 1(0.58%), P =0.009) only in residents those with low thrombosis risk (CHA 2 DS 2 -VaSc<2). Conclusions: Screening in elderly (≥65 years old) can significantly improve the detection rate of asymptomatic AF by wearing single lead dynamic ECG device. The rate increased significantly with the increase of risk factors associated with AF by single screening. In addition, repeat screening of the same method may only improve detection rates in the group with low risk thrombotic scores and non-combination of AF risk factors.Screening methods that are appropriate for different populations may require further exploration.

Purpose of Review: Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is the leading cause of death in young athletes during sports participation. Preparticipation cardiovascular screening aims to identify those at an increased risk of SCD. This review aims to provide a background of SCD in young athletes, to discuss the various screening recommendations of major medical societies, and to review recent evidence and current practice., Recent Findings: Numerous studies have evaluated various preparticipation screening practices, particularly regarding the inclusion of ECG as part of an initial evaluation to identify conditions with an increased risk of SCD. Some analyses have shown ECG inclusion to provide increased screening sensitivity and specificity, though others have shown no benefit when compared with evaluation with history and physical examination alone. Furthermore, in countries for which more extensive screening protocols have been employed, postimplementation statistics have not shown a significant decrease in SCD., Summary: SCD in young athletes primarily results from underlying cardiac disease. Various preparticipation screening recommendations exist globally, with the common goal of decreasing the rates of SCD by identifying youth at risk during sports participation. Current guidelines in the United States support universal preparticipation evaluation using history and physical examination, with cardiology referral if abnormalities are identified., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Overdiagnosis is increasingly recognized as a harm of breast cancer screening, particularly for older women., Objective: To estimate overdiagnosis associated with breast cancer screening among older women by age., Design: Retrospective cohort study comparing the cumulative incidence of breast cancer among older women who continued screening in the next interval with those who did not. Analyses used competing risk models, stratified by age., Setting: Fee-for-service Medicare claims, linked to the SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) program., Patients: Women 70 years and older who had been recently screened., Measurements: Breast cancer diagnoses and breast cancer death for up to 15 years of follow-up., Results: This study included 54 635 women. Among women aged 70 to 74 years, the adjusted cumulative incidence of breast cancer was 6.1 cases (95% CI, 5.7 to 6.4) per 100 screened women versus 4.2 cases (CI, 3.5 to 5.0) per 100 unscreened women. An estimated 31% of breast cancer among screened women were potentially overdiagnosed. For women aged 75 to 84 years, cumulative incidence was 4.9 (CI, 4.6 to 5.2) per 100 screened women versus 2.6 (CI, 2.2 to 3.0) per 100 unscreened women, with 47% of cases potentially overdiagnosed. For women aged 85 and older, the cumulative incidence was 2.8 (CI, 2.3 to 3.4) among screened women versus 1.3 (CI, 0.9 to 1.9) among those not, with up to 54% overdiagnosis. We did not see statistically significant reductions in breast cancer-specific death associated with screening., Limitations: This study was designed to estimate overdiagnosis, limiting our ability to draw conclusions on all benefits and harms of screening. Unmeasured differences in risk for breast cancer and differential competing mortality between screened and unscreened women may confound results. Results were sensitive to model specifications and definition of a screening mammogram., Conclusion: Continued breast cancer screening was associated with greater incidence of breast cancer, suggesting overdiagnosis may be common among older women who are diagnosed with breast cancer after screening. Whether harms of overdiagnosis are balanced by benefits and for whom remains an important question., Primary Funding Source: National Cancer Institute., Competing Interests: Disclosures: Disclosures can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=M23-0133.

Background: Hearing loss is a significant risk factor for dementia. To date, cognitive impairment and dementia in patients with hearing impairment (HI) cannot be adequately diagnosed by commonly administered cognitive screening tests due to sensory impairments. Therefore, an adapted screening is needed. The aim of the present study was to develop and evaluate a cognitive screening for people with HI., Materials and Methods: The new cognitive screening, called O‑DEM, entails a word fluency test, the Trail Making Test A (TMT-A), and a subtraction task. First, the O‑DEM was tested in a large clinical sample (N = 2837) of people without subjective HI. In a second step, the O‑DEM was evaluated in 213 patients with objectively assessed HI and compared with the Hearing-Impaired Montreal Cognitive Assessment (HI-MoCA)., Results: The results indicate that the O‑DEM subtests significantly discriminate between participants with no, mild, and moderate to severe cognitive impairment. Based on the mean and standard deviation of the participants without cognitive impairment, a transformation of the raw scores was performed and a total score with a maximum value of 10 was determined. In the second part of the study, the O‑DEM was shown to be as sensitive as the HI-MoCA in differentiating between people with and without cognitive impairment., Conclusion: Compared to other screenings, the O‑DEM is a quickly administrable screening for the detection of mild and moderate cognitive impairment in people with HI., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objectives: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) can cause significant visual impairment which can be largely avoided by early detection through proper screening and treatment. People with DR face a number of challenges from early detection to treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate factors that influence DR screening in Thailand and to identify barriers to follow-up compliance from patient, family member, and health care provider (HCP) perspectives., Methods: A total of 15 focus group discussions (FGDs) were held, each with five to twelve participants. There were three distinct stakeholders: diabetic patients (n = 47) presenting to a diabetic retinopathy clinic in Thailand, their family members (n = 41), and health care providers (n = 34). All focus group conversations were transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was used to examine textual material., Results: Different themes emerged from the FGD on knowledge about diabetes, self-care behaviors of diabetes mellitus (DM), awareness about DR, barriers to DR screening, and the suggested solutions to address those barriers. Data showed lower knowledge and awareness about diabetes and DR in both patients and family members. Long waiting times, financial issues, and lack of a person to accompany appointments were identified as the major deterrents for attending DR screening. Family support for patients was found to vary widely, with some patients reporting to have received adequate support while others reported having received minimal support. Even though insurance covered the cost of attending diabetes/DR screening program, some patients did not show up for their appointments., Conclusion: Patients need to be well-informed about the asymptomatic nature of diabetes and DR. Communication at the patient level and shared decision-making with HCPs are essential. Family members and non-physician clinicians (such as diabetes nurses, diabetes educators, physician assistants) who work in the field of diabetes play a vital role in encouraging patients to attend diabetes and DR follow-ups visits regularly., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Kumar et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Importance: Familial hypercholesterolemia and multifactorial dyslipidemia are 2 conditions that cause abnormally high lipid levels in children, which can lead to premature cardiovascular events (eg, myocardial infarction and stroke) and death in adulthood., Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for lipid disorders in asymptomatic children and adolescents., Population: Asymptomatic children and adolescents 20 years or younger without a known diagnosis of a lipid disorder., Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient and the balance of benefits and harms for screening for lipid disorders in asymptomatic children and adolescents 20 years or younger cannot be determined., Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for lipid disorders in children and adolescents 20 years or younger. (I statement).

Objective: Population screening for aneurysms in patients with risk factors and preventive surgical treatment are beneficial according to numerous studies. One of the most significant risk factors is heredity, namely, the presence of first-degree relatives (FDR) with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). Nevertheless, there are still no generally accepted approaches or evidence bases regarding the benefits of the aneurysm screening strategy., Methods: Mathematical modeling of the dynamics of aneurysm development in the population was carried out using an algorithm implementing a discrete Markov's chain. To implement the model, all probabilities of events and distributions are taken from available literature sources. Three-dimensional time of flight noncontrast magnetic resonance angiography was chosen as a screening method. Patients underwent preventive surgical treatment if an aneurysm was detected., Results: Screening and preventive treatment in the general population reduces the prevalence of aneurysms by 1.74% (3.44% in the FDR group) and the prevalence of aSAH by 14.36% (37.48% in the FDR group). Mortality due to aSAH was reduced by 14.44%. The number of disabilities also decreases. The occurrence of deep disability was reduced by 20.2% in the FDR group. Economic analysis of the part of the population consisting of FDRs showed annual savings of ies also decr CONCLUSIONS: The mathematical model demonstrated that screening and preventive treatment of cerebral aneurysms can reduce aSAH-associated morbidity and mortality. In the FDR group, there was decrease in the prevalence of aSAH and decrease in associated mortality. Screening for cerebral aneurysms is cost-effective., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Anxiety is commonly seen in primary care and associated with substantial burden., Objective: To review the benefits and harms of screening and treatment for anxiety and the accuracy of instruments to detect anxiety among primary care patients., Data Sources: MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Cochrane library through September 7, 2022; references of existing reviews; ongoing surveillance for relevant literature through November 25, 2022., Study Selection: English-language original studies and systematic reviews of screening or treatment compared with control conditions and test accuracy studies of a priori-selected screening instruments were included. Two investigators independently reviewed abstracts and full-text articles for inclusion. Two investigators independently rated study quality., Data Extraction and Synthesis: One investigator abstracted data; a second checked accuracy. Meta-analysis results were included from existing systematic reviews where available; meta-analyses were conducted on original research when evidence was sufficient., Main Outcomes and Measures: Anxiety and depression outcomes; global quality of life and functioning; sensitivity and specificity of screening tools., Results: Of the 59 publications included, 40 were original studies (N = 275 489) and 19 were systematic reviews (including ≈483 studies [N≈81 507]). Two screening studies found no benefit for screening for anxiety. Among test accuracy studies, only the Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) GAD-2 and GAD-7 screening instruments were evaluated by more than 1 study. Both screening instruments had adequate accuracy for detecting generalized anxiety disorder (eg, across 3 studies the GAD-7 at a cutoff of 10 had a pooled sensitivity of 0.79 [95% CI, 0.69 to 0.94] and specificity of 0.89 [95% CI, 0.83 to 0.94]). Evidence was limited for other instruments and other anxiety disorders. A large body of evidence supported the benefit of treatment for anxiety. For example, psychological interventions were associated with a small pooled standardized mean difference of -0.41 in anxiety symptom severity in primary care patients with anxiety (95% CI, -0.58 to -0.23]; 10 RCTs [n = 2075]; I2 = 40.2%); larger effects were found in general adult populations., Conclusions and Relevance: Evidence was insufficient to draw conclusions about the benefits or harms of anxiety screening programs. However, clear evidence exists that treatment for anxiety is beneficial, and more limited evidence indicates that some anxiety screening instruments have acceptable accuracy to detect generalized anxiety disorder.

Importance: Anxiety disorders are commonly occurring mental health conditions. They are often unrecognized in primary care settings and substantial delays in treatment initiation occur., Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for anxiety disorders in asymptomatic adults., Population: Asymptomatic adults 19 years or older, including pregnant and postpartum persons. Older adults are defined as those 65 years or older., Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for anxiety disorders in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons, has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on screening for anxiety disorders in older adults., Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for anxiety disorders in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for anxiety disorders in older adults. (I statement).

Importance: Depression is common and associated with substantial burden. Suicide rates have increased over the past decade, and both suicide attempts and deaths have devastating effects on individuals and families., Objective: To review the benefits and harms of screening and treatment for depression and suicide risk and the accuracy of instruments to detect these conditions among primary care patients., Data Sources: MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Cochrane library through September 7, 2022; references of existing reviews; ongoing surveillance for relevant literature through November 25, 2022., Study Selection: English-language studies of screening or treatment compared with control conditions, or test accuracy of screening instruments (for depression, instruments were selected a priori; for suicide risk, all were included). Existing systematic reviews were used for treatment and test accuracy for depression., Data Extraction and Synthesis: One investigator abstracted data; a second checked accuracy. Two investigators independently rated study quality. Findings were synthesized qualitatively, including reporting of meta-analysis results from existing systematic reviews; meta-analyses were conducted on original research when evidence was sufficient., Main Outcomes and Measures: Depression outcomes; suicidal ideation, attempts, and deaths; sensitivity and specificity of screening tools., Results: For depression, 105 studies were included: 32 original studies (N=385 607) and 73 systematic reviews (including ≈2138 studies [N ≈ 9.8 million]). Depression screening interventions, many of which included additional components beyond screening, were associated with a lower prevalence of depression or clinically important depressive symptomatology after 6 to 12 months (pooled odds ratio, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.50-0.73]; reported in 8 randomized clinical trials [n=10 244]; I2 = 0%). Several instruments demonstrated adequate test accuracy (eg, for the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire at a cutoff of 10 or greater, the pooled sensitivity was 0.85 [95% CI, 0.79-0.89] and specificity was 0.85 [95% CI, 0.82-0.88]; reported in 47 studies [n = 11 234]). A large body of evidence supported benefits of psychological and pharmacologic treatment of depression. A pooled estimate from trials used for US Food and Drug Administration approval suggested a very small increase in the absolute risk of a suicide attempt with second-generation antidepressants (odds ratio, 1.53 [95% CI, 1.09-2.15]; n = 40 857; 0.7% of antidepressant users had a suicide attempt vs 0.3% of placebo users; median follow-up, 8 weeks). Twenty-seven studies (n = 24 826) addressed suicide risk. One randomized clinical trial (n=443) of a suicide risk screening intervention found no difference in suicidal ideation after 2 weeks between primary care patients who were and were not screened for suicide risk. Three studies of suicide risk test accuracy were included; none included replication of any instrument. The included suicide prevention studies generally did not demonstrate an improvement over usual care, which typically included specialty mental health treatment., Conclusions and Relevance: Evidence supported depression screening in primary care settings, including during pregnancy and postpartum. There are numerous important gaps in the evidence for suicide risk screening in primary care settings.

Importance: Major depressive disorder (MDD), a common mental disorder in the US, may have substantial impact on the lives of affected individuals. If left untreated, MDD can interfere with daily functioning and can also be associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events, exacerbation of comorbid conditions, or increased mortality., Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate benefits and harms of screening, accuracy of screening, and benefits and harms of treatment of MDD and suicide risk in asymptomatic adults that would be applicable to primary care settings., Population: Asymptomatic adults 19 years or older, including pregnant and postpartum persons. Older adults are defined as those 65 years or older., Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for MDD in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults, has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on the benefit and harms of screening for suicide risk in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults., Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for depression in the adult population, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for suicide risk in the adult population, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults. (I statement).

Background and Objective: Asbestos is a major risk factor for lung cancer, with or without tobacco smoke exposure. Low dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening for early lung cancer is effective but only when targeting high risk populations. This study aimed to analyse the effectiveness of LDCT screening in an asbestos exposed population and to compare lung cancer screening program (LCSP) eligibility criteria., Methods: Participants in an asbestos health surveillance program, the Western Australia Asbestos Review Program, underwent at least one LDCT scan and lung function assessment as part of annual review between 2012 and 2017. Lung cancer cases were confirmed through linkage to the WA cancer registry. Theoretical eligibility for different screening programs was calculated., Results: Five thousand seven hundred and two LDCT scans were performed on 1743 individuals. The median age was 69.8 years, 1481 (85.0%) were male and 1147 (65.8%) were ever-smokers (median pack-year exposure of 20.0). Overall, 26 lung cancers were detected (1.5% of the population; 3.5 cases per 1000 person-years of observation). Lung cancer was early stage in 86.4% and four (15.4%) cases were never smokers. Based on current lung screening program criteria, 1299 (74.5%) of this population, including the majority (17, 65.4%) of lung cancer cases, would not have been eligible for any LCSP., Conclusion: This population is at raised risk despite modest tobacco exposure. LDCT screening is effective at identifying early-stage lung cancer in this population and existing lung cancer risk criteria do not capture this population adequately., (© 2023 The Authors. Respirology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Asian Pacific Society of Respirology.)

Objective: This study aims to comprehensively assess the direct, severe harms of screening colonoscopy in the United States. Whereas other investigators have completed systematic reviews estimating the harms of all types of colonoscopy, this analysis focuses on screening colonoscopies that had adequate follow up to avoid undercounting delayed harms., Data Sources: PubMed and Embase were queried for relevant studies on screening colonoscopy harms published between January 1, 2002, and April 1, 2022., Study Selection: English-language studies of screening colonoscopy for average risk patients were included. Studies must have followed patients for adequate time post procedure, defined as 30 days after colonoscopy., Main Outcomes: The primary outcome was the number of severe bleeding events and gastrointestinal (GI) perforations within 30 days of screening colonoscopy., Results: A total of 1951 studies were reviewed for inclusion; 94 were reviewed in full text. Of those reviewed in full, 6 studies, including a total of 467,139 colonoscopies, met our inclusion criteria and were included in our analysis of harms related to screening colonoscopies. The rate of severe bleeding ranged credibly from 16.4 to 36.18 per 10,000 colonoscopies; the rate of perforation ranged credibly from 7.62 to 8.50 per 10,000 colonoscopies., Conclusions: This study is the first to estimate direct harms from screening colonoscopy, including harms that occur up to 30 days after the procedure. The risk of harm subsequent to screening colonoscopy is higher than previously reported and should be discussed with patients when engaging in shared decision making., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: None., (© Copyright by the American Board of Family Medicine.)

Importance: Latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) can progress to active tuberculosis disease, causing morbidity and mortality., Objective: To review the evidence on benefits and harms of screening for and treatment of LTBI in adults to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF)., Data Sources: PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and trial registries through December 3, 2021; references; experts; literature surveillance through January 20, 2023., Study Selection: English-language studies of LTBI screening, LTBI treatment, or accuracy of the tuberculin skin test (TST) or interferon-gamma release assays (IGRAs). Studies of LTBI screening and treatment for public health surveillance or disease management were excluded., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Dual review of abstracts, full-text articles, and study quality; qualitative synthesis of findings; meta-analyses conducted when a sufficient number of similar studies were available., Main Outcomes and Measures: Screening test accuracy; development of active tuberculosis disease, transmission, quality of life, mortality, and harms., Results: A total of 113 publications were included (112 studies; N = 69 009). No studies directly evaluated the benefits and harms of screening. Pooled estimates for sensitivity of the TST were 0.80 (95% CI, 0.74-0.87) at the 5-mm induration threshold, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.76-0.87) at the 10-mm threshold, and 0.60 (95% CI, 0.46-0.74) at the 15-mm threshold. Pooled estimates for sensitivity of IGRA tests ranged from 0.81 (95% CI, 0.79-0.84) to 0.90 (95% CI, 0.87-0.92). Pooled estimates for specificity of screening tests ranged from 0.95 to 0.99. For treatment of LTBI, a large (n = 27 830), good-quality randomized clinical trial found a relative risk (RR) for progression to active tuberculosis at 5 years of 0.35 (95% CI, 0.24-0.52) for 24 weeks of isoniazid compared with placebo (number needed to treat, 112) and an increase in hepatotoxicity (RR, 4.59 [95% CI, 2.03-10.39]; number needed to harm, 279). A previously published meta-analysis reported that multiple regimens were efficacious compared with placebo or no treatment. Meta-analysis found greater risk for hepatotoxicity with isoniazid than with rifampin (pooled RR, 4.22 [95% CI, 2.21-8.06]; n = 7339)., Conclusions and Relevance: No studies directly evaluated the benefits and harms of screening for LTBI compared with no screening. TST and IGRAs were moderately sensitive and highly specific. Treatment of LTBI with recommended regimens reduced the risk of progression to active tuberculosis. Isoniazid was associated with higher rates of hepatotoxicity than placebo or rifampin.

Importance: In the US, tuberculosis remains an important preventable disease, including active tuberculosis, which may be infectious, and latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI), which is asymptomatic and not infectious but can later progress to active disease. The precise prevalence rate of LTBI in the US is difficult to determine; however, estimated prevalence is about 5.0%, or up to 13 million persons. Incidence of tuberculosis varies by geography and living accommodations, suggesting an association with social determinants of health., Objective: To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on LTBI screening and treatment in asymptomatic adults seen in primary care, as well as the accuracy of LTBI screening tests., Population: Asymptomatic adults 18 years or older at increased risk for tuberculosis., Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that there is a moderate net benefit in preventing active tuberculosis disease by screening for LTBI in persons at increased risk for tuberculosis infection., Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for LTBI in populations at increased risk. (B recommendation).

Fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is often used for preselection for colonoscopy, but FIT has nonoptimal sensitivity. Selection of study participant for colonoscopy based on the result of combining FIT with risk factors could improve the sensitivity of a screening program. We aimed to develop a risk prediction system of colorectal neoplasia among asymptomatic Chinese subjects. A total of 6265 asymptomatic participants with age between 50 and 70 years were invited to undergo colonoscopy screening. They were also asked to take FIT and complete a questionnaire for collecting information on risk factors. Independent risk factors were identified by binary logistic regression for colorectal neoplasia. A risk score model was developed by using the odds ratios of significant risk factors. The scoring system was divided into two groups of risk: negative risk and positive risk. The performance of the risk score model in terms of predicting colorectal neoplasia was evaluated. Of the 1786 colonoscopy screening participants, 1546 completed FIT and questionnaires. A total of 462 cases of neoplasia were detected. Based on the scoring stratification, 966 (62.5%) participants were in negative risk tier and 580 (37.5%) were in positive risk tier. The incidence of colorectal neoplasia in negative risk and positive risk groups was 18.4 and 49.0%, respectively. Risk stratification model has better ability to discriminate those with or without colorectal neoplasia than FIT-only model. Classification improved significantly with risk stratification-based screening (net reclassification improvement = 0.064, P = 0.032). Risk stratification system increases the predictive value of FIT-based screening and is useful for preselection for colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening program., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Skin cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in the US. There are different types of skin cancer varying in disease incidence and severity. Basal and squamous cell carcinomas are the most common types of skin cancer but infrequently lead to death or substantial morbidity. Melanomas represent about 1% of skin cancer and cause the most skin cancer deaths. Melanoma is about 30 times more common in White persons than in Black persons. However, persons with darker skin color are often diagnosed at later stages, when skin cancer is more difficult to treat., Objective: To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on the benefits and harms of screening for skin cancer in asymptomatic adolescents and adults., Population: Asymptomatic adolescents and adults who do not have a history of premalignant or malignant skin lesions., Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of visual skin examination by a clinician to screen for skin cancer in asymptomatic adolescents and adults., Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of visual skin examination by a clinician to screen for skin cancer in adolescents and adults. (I statement).

Importance: Skin cancer is the most common cancer type and is a major cause of morbidity., Objective: To systematically review the benefits and harms of screening for skin cancer to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force., Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from June 1, 2015, through January 7, 2022; surveillance through December 16, 2022., Study Selection: English-language studies conducted in asymptomatic populations 15 years or older., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers independently appraised the articles and extracted relevant data from fair- or good-quality studies; results were narratively summarized., Main Outcomes and Measures: Morbidity; mortality; skin cancer stage, precursor lesions, or lesion thickness at detection; harms of screening., Results: Twenty studies in 29 articles were included (N = 6 053 411). Direct evidence on screening effectiveness was from 3 nonrandomized analyses of 2 population-based skin cancer screening programs in Germany (n = 1 791 615) and suggested no melanoma mortality benefit at the population level over 4 to 10 years' follow-up. Six studies (n = 2 935 513) provided inconsistent evidence on the association between clinician skin examination and lesion thickness or stage at diagnosis. Compared with usual care, routine clinician skin examination was not associated with increased detection of skin cancer or precursor lesions (5 studies) or stage at melanoma detection (3 studies). Evidence on the association between clinician skin examination and lesion thickness at detection was inconsistent (3 studies). Nine studies (n = 1 326 051) found a consistent positive association between more advanced stage at melanoma detection and increasing risk of melanoma-associated and all-cause mortality. Two studies (n = 232) found little to no persistent cosmetic or psychosocial harms associated with screening., Conclusions and Relevance: A substantial nonrandomized evidence base suggests a clear association between earlier stage at skin cancer detection and decreased mortality risk. However, nonrandomized studies suggest little to no melanoma mortality benefit associated with skin cancer screening with visual skin examination in adolescents or adults and no association between routine clinician skin examination and earlier stage at melanoma detection. Evidence is inconsistent regarding whether clinician skin examination is associated with thinner melanoma lesions at detection.

Background: Cervical cancer (CaCU) is the second cancer-related cause of death for women in Mexico. Early diagnosis and monitoring of patients by cervical cytology and colposcopy are currently the preferred screening methods for identification and prevention of this disease., Objective: To describe the epidemiological panorama of cervical dysplasia diagnosed in a first-level care hospital., Methods: The study was observational, retrospective, unicentric, homodemic, transversal. Records from 6,207 women who attended the General Subzone Hospital with Familiar Medicine #8 (HGSZ/UMF 8), in Tlaxcala, Mexico were analyzed. First-time cervical cytologies were analyzed from 2019 to 2021., Results: Cervical dysplasia was found in 2.6% of the patients being the most frequent type of dysplasia NIC 1. Most of the clinical characteristics of patients with dysplasia were in agreement with those of the Mexican population. Important differences were found (comorbilities, mass index, number of sexual partners, births, positivity to changes related to HPV and vaccination) between two population sets defined by age (younger and older than 40 years)., Conclusions: The only factor where a tendency to be associated to type 2 and 3 dysplasia in the population younger than 40 years was the sexually active onset of life younger than 18 years, so this possible association should be evaluated in a bigger population. Our data suggests that risks factors should be evaluated separately for these age groups due to important differences regarding their clinic and epidemiological characteristics as well as changes in risk factor exposure., (© 2023 Revista Médica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social.)

Age is the strongest risk factor for colorectal cancer. Although there is updated guidance for the age at which to start screening, there is little guidance for individuals or their medical teams on how to decide when to stop. Current recommendations from the US Preventive Services Task Force and other societies focus primarily on age. For patients older than 85 years, guidelines discourage screening because the harms largely outweigh benefits. Although at a population level, the overall benefit of screening in older individuals decreases, one must individualize the recommendation based on comorbidities, functional status, screening history, and gender-not solely base it on age. Patient and caregiver preferences must also be thoroughly explored. Current models struggle with incorporating other colorectal cancer risk factors such as family history, previous adenomas, and modality of previous screening into recommendations and simulations, but are likely to improve with machine learning and whole electronic health record prediction-based approaches., (Copyright © 2023 by The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Importance: Genital herpes is a common sexually transmitted infection caused by 2 related viruses, herpes simplex type 1 (HSV-1) and herpes simplex type 2 (HSV-2). Infection is lifelong; currently, there is no cure for HSV infection. Antiviral medications may provide clinical benefits to symptomatic persons. Transmission of HSV from a pregnant person to their infant can occur, most commonly during delivery; when genital lesions or prodromal symptoms are present, cesarean delivery can reduce the risk of transmission. Neonatal herpes infection is uncommon yet can result in substantial morbidity and mortality., Objective: To reaffirm its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a reaffirmation evidence update on targeted key questions to systematically evaluate the evidence on accuracy, benefits, and harms of routine serologic screening for HSV-2 infection in asymptomatic adolescents, adults, and pregnant persons., Population: Adolescents and adults, including pregnant persons, without known history, signs, or symptoms of genital HSV infection., Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the harms outweigh the benefits for population-based screening for genital HSV infection in asymptomatic adolescents and adults, including pregnant persons., Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends against routine serologic screening for genital HSV infection in asymptomatic adolescents and adults, including pregnant persons. (D recommendation).

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a sight threatening complication of diabetes mellitus (DM). The incidence of DR in the pediatric population has increased in the last two decades and it is expected to further rise in the future, following the increase in DM prevalence and obesity in youth. As early stages of the retinal disease are asymptomatic, screening programs are of extreme importance to guarantee a prompt diagnosis and avoid progression to more advanced, sight threatening stages. The management of DR comprises a wide range of actions starting from glycemic control, continuing with systemic and local medical treatments, up to para-surgical and surgical approaches to deal with the more aggressive complications. In this review we will describe the pathophysiology of DR trying to understand all the possible targets for currently available or future treatments. We will briefly consider the impact of screening techniques, screening strategies and their social and economic impact. Finally a large part of the review will be dedicated to medical and surgical treatments for DR including both currently available and under development therapies. Most of the available data in the literature on DR are focused on the adult population. The aim of our work is to provide clinicians and researchers with a comprehensive overview of the state of the art regarding DR in the pediatric population, considering the increasing numbers of this diseases in youth and the inevitable consequences that such a chronic disease could have if poorly managed in children., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest disclosures have been reported in the dedicated document., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Systemic sclerosis, previously known as scleroderma, is a heterogeneous, systemic disease that is defined by its 3 pathological hallmarks: the production of autoantibodies, small vessel vasculopathy, and fibroblast dysfunction, leading to an increased deposition of extracellular matrix. We conducted a review of the available literature that covers the cardiovascular manifestations of SSc: electrical conduction abnormalities, pulmonary hypertension, pericardial disease, and atherosclerosis. Within each major category, we will discuss the definition, diagnostics, and available treatment options. Increased mortality from cardiovascular complications necessitates early screening and management. Annual screening with noninvasive modalities is encouraged. The current management of each complication generally follows the management algorithms of patients regardless of SSc status and is dependent on the severity of the patient's clinical presentation., Competing Interests: Disclosure: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Objective: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is increasing in the United States, with higher rates among minoritized racial and ethnic populations and lower income populations. GDM increases risk for type 2 diabetes (T2DM), and postpartum diabetes screening and prevention are imperative. This qualitative study examines barriers and facilitators to postpartum T2DM screening and prevention among non-privately insured individuals with a history of GDM in a state prior to Medicaid expansion., Methods: Thirty-six non-privately insured women with a history of GDM completed semi-structured interviews. Four focus groups and seven interviews were conducted with 30 nurse practitioners, physicians, physician assistants, nurses and registered dietitians from Federally Qualified Health Centers in St. Louis, MO. Interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed. Data were analyzed using an integrative thematic analysis informed by the socio-ecological model., Results: Barriers and facilitators to T2DM screening and prevention occur across multiple environments (society, healthcare system, interpersonal, and individual). Societal barriers include insurance issues, unemployment, and lack of transportation, childcare, safe housing, and healthy food access, while facilitators include government sponsored programs and community organizations. Healthcare system barriers include care fragmentation, scheduling policies and time constraints while facilitators include care coordination, pregnancy support groups, and education materials. Interpersonal barriers include negative care experiences, cultural differences, communication challenges, competing priorities, and lack of a social support network, while facilitators include family and friend support and positive care experiences. Individual barriers include health complications and unhealthy food and exercise patterns, while facilitators include child wellbeing, empowered attitudes and healthy food and exercise patterns., Conclusions: The socioecological model highlights the societal and systemic determinants that encompass individual and interpersonal factors affecting postpartum T2DM screening and prevention. This framework can inform multi-level interventions to increase postpartum T2DM screening and prevention in this high-risk population, including policy changes to alleviate higher-level barriers., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2022 Sinha et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Importance: Current prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in the US is not well established; however, based on cohort and survey data, in 2007-2010 the estimated prevalence of at least mild OSA (defined as an apnea-hypoxia index [AHI] ≥5) plus symptoms of daytime sleepiness among adults aged 30 to 70 years was 14% for men and 5% for women, and the estimated prevalence of moderate to severe OSA (defined as AHI ≥15) was 13% for men and 6% for women. Severe OSA is associated with increased all-cause mortality. Other adverse health outcomes associated with untreated OSA include cardiovascular disease and cerebrovascular events, type 2 diabetes, cognitive impairment, decreased quality of life, and motor vehicle crashes., Objective: To update its 2017 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for OSA in adults., Population: Asymptomatic adults (18 years or older) and adults with unrecognized symptoms of OSA., Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for OSA in the general adult population., Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for OSA in the general adult population. (I statement).

Background: Cancer screening should be recommended only when the balance between benefits and harms is favorable. This review evaluated how U.S. cancer screening guidelines reported harms, within and across organ-specific processes to screen for cancer., Objective: To describe current reporting practices and identify opportunities for improvement., Design: Review of guidelines., Setting: United States., Patients: Patients eligible for screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer according to U.S. guidelines., Measurements: Information was abstracted on reporting of patient-level harms associated with screening, diagnostic follow-up, and treatment. The authors classified harms reporting as not mentioned, conceptual, qualitative, or quantitative and noted whether literature was cited when harms were described. Frequency of harms reporting was summarized by organ type., Results: Harms reporting was inconsistent across organ types and at each step of the cancer screening process. Guidelines did not report all harms for any specific organ type or for any category of harm across organ types. The most complete harms reporting was for prostate cancer screening guidelines and the least complete for colorectal cancer screening guidelines. Conceptualization of harms and use of quantitative evidence also differed by organ type., Limitations: This review considers only patient-level harms. The authors did not verify accuracy of harms information presented in the guidelines., Conclusion: The review identified opportunities for improving conceptualization, assessment, and reporting of screening process-related harms in guidelines. Future work should consider nuances associated with each organ-specific process to screen for cancer, including which harms are most salient and where evidence gaps exist, and explicitly explore how to optimally weigh available evidence in determining net screening benefit. Improved harms reporting could aid informed decision making, ultimately improving cancer screening delivery., Primary Funding Source: National Cancer Institute.

Background: Although colonoscopy is widely used as a screening test to detect colorectal cancer, its effect on the risks of colorectal cancer and related death is unclear., Methods: We performed a pragmatic, randomized trial involving presumptively healthy men and women 55 to 64 years of age drawn from population registries in Poland, Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands between 2009 and 2014. The participants were randomly assigned in a 1:2 ratio either to receive an invitation to undergo a single screening colonoscopy (the invited group) or to receive no invitation or screening (the usual-care group). The primary end points were the risks of colorectal cancer and related death, and the secondary end point was death from any cause., Results: Follow-up data were available for 84,585 participants in Poland, Norway, and Sweden - 28,220 in the invited group, 11,843 of whom (42.0%) underwent screening, and 56,365 in the usual-care group. A total of 15 participants had major bleeding after polyp removal. No perforations or screening-related deaths occurred within 30 days after colonoscopy. During a median follow-up of 10 years, 259 cases of colorectal cancer were diagnosed in the invited group as compared with 622 cases in the usual-care group. In intention-to-screen analyses, the risk of colorectal cancer at 10 years was 0.98% in the invited group and 1.20% in the usual-care group, a risk reduction of 18% (risk ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 0.93). The risk of death from colorectal cancer was 0.28% in the invited group and 0.31% in the usual-care group (risk ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.16). The number needed to invite to undergo screening to prevent one case of colorectal cancer was 455 (95% CI, 270 to 1429). The risk of death from any cause was 11.03% in the invited group and 11.04% in the usual-care group (risk ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.04)., Conclusions: In this randomized trial, the risk of colorectal cancer at 10 years was lower among participants who were invited to undergo screening colonoscopy than among those who were assigned to no screening. (Funded by the Research Council of Norway and others; NordICC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00883792.)., (Copyright © 2022 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Importance: Depression is a leading cause of disability in the US. Children and adolescents with depression typically have functional impairments in their performance at school or work as well as in their interactions with their families and peers. Depression can also negatively affect the developmental trajectories of affected youth. Major depressive disorder (MDD) in children and adolescents is strongly associated with recurrent depression in adulthood; other mental disorders; and increased risk for suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and suicide completion. Suicide is the second-leading cause of death among youth aged 10 to 19 years. Psychiatric disorders and previous suicide attempts increase suicide risk., Objective: To update its 2014 and 2016 recommendations, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening, accuracy of screening, and benefits and harms of treatment of MDD and suicide risk in children and adolescents that would be applicable to primary care settings., Population: Children and adolescents who do not have a diagnosed mental health condition or are not showing recognized signs or symptoms of depression or suicide risk., Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for MDD in adolescents aged 12 to 18 years has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on screening for MDD in children 11 years or younger. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on the benefit and harms of screening for suicide risk in children and adolescents owing to a lack of evidence., Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for MDD in adolescents aged 12 to 18 years. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for MDD in children 11 years or younger. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for suicide risk in children and adolescents. (I statement).

Importance: Depression, suicidal ideation, and self-harm behaviors in youth are associated with functional impairment and suicide., Objective: To review the evidence on screening for depression or suicide risk in children and adolescents to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF)., Data Sources: PubMed, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and trial registries through July 19, 2021; references, experts, and surveillance through June 1, 2022., Study Selection: English-language, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of screening for depression or suicide risk; diagnostic test accuracy studies; RCTs of psychotherapy and first-line pharmacotherapy; RCTs, observational studies, and systematic reviews reporting harms., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers assessed titles/abstracts, full-text articles, and study quality and extracted data; when at least 3 similar studies were available, meta-analyses were conducted., Main Outcomes and Measures: Test accuracy, symptoms, response, remission, loss of diagnosis, mortality, functioning, suicide-related events, and adverse events., Results: Twenty-one studies (N = 5433) were included for depression and 19 studies (N = 6290) for suicide risk. For depression, no studies reported on the direct effects of screening on health outcomes, and 7 studies (n = 3281) reported sensitivity of screening instruments ranging from 0.59 to 0.94 and specificity from 0.38 to 0.96. Depression treatment with psychotherapy was associated with improved symptoms (Beck Depression Inventory pooled standardized mean difference, -0.58 [95% CI, -0.83 to -0.34]; n = 471; 4 studies; and Hamilton Depression Scale pooled mean difference, -2.25 [95% CI, -4.09 to -0.41]; n = 262; 3 studies) clinical response (3 studies with statistically significant results using varying thresholds), and loss of diagnosis (relative risk, 1.73 [95% CI, 1.00 to 3.00; n = 395; 4 studies). Pharmacotherapy was associated with improvement on symptoms (Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised mean difference, -3.76 [95% CI, -5.95 to -1.57; n = 793; 3 studies), remission (relative risk, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.00 to 1.45]; n = 793; 3 studies) and functioning (Children's Global Assessment Scale pooled mean difference, 2.60 (95% CI, 0.78 to 4.42; n = 793; 3 studies). Other outcomes were not statistically significantly different. Differences in suicide-related outcomes and adverse events for pharmacotherapy when compared with placebo were not statistically significant. For suicide risk, no studies reported on the direct benefits of screening on health outcomes, and 2 RCTs (n = 2675) reported no harms of screening. One study (n = 581) reported on sensitivity of screening, ranging from 0.87 to 0.91; specificity was 0.60. Sixteen RCTs (n = 3034) reported on suicide risk interventions. Interventions were associated with lower scores for the Beck Hopelessness Scale (pooled mean difference, -2.35 [95% CI, -4.06 to -0.65]; n = 644; 4 RCTs). Findings for other suicide-related outcomes were mixed or not statistically significantly different., Conclusion and Relevance: Indirect evidence suggested that some screening instruments were reasonably accurate for detecting depression. Psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy were associated with some benefits and no statistically significant harms for depression, but the evidence was limited for suicide risk screening instruments and interventions.

Thrombophilia, where multiple genetic and acquired risk factors interact synergistically, are associated with thrombosis and pregnancy-related complications. Despite being studied profusely, an inconsistent association exists between thrombophilia and pregnancy complications. Between 2018 and 2020, ninety-three women with pregnancy complications were enrolled in the study. Twenty-five healthy pregnant women without pregnancy complications reported to the same hospital were also recruited as controls. Blood samples were tested for homocysteine, coagulation studies, and molecular diagnosis included FVL, PTH and MTHFR genes amplified using PCR strip assay (Vienna Lab Diagnostics, Austria). Other thrombophilia screening, including testing for AT, PC, and LA, were done by chromogenic assays (Dade Diagnostica, Munich, Germany). Homocysteine level was determined by fluorescence polarization immunoassay technology (Axsym, Abbot company, Germany). Overall, 29.03% of women with pregnancy complications had thrombophilia relative to 16% in the control group. However, the difference between the case and control groups did not reach a significant level (p=0.1175). Additionally, combined thrombophilia was more prevalent among cases (10.75%) than in the control group (4%). However, the difference did not reach statistical significance (p=0.1046). Our study demonstrated that the frequency of thrombophilia among healthy women was 16%, and among women with pregnancy-related complications, 29%. Relative to control, all measured thrombophilia markers were more frequent in women with pregnancy-related complications except for LA. Including all the studies on the Saudi population in a meta-analysis study could reveal more information about thrombophilia and pregnancy-related complications in our population., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (©2022 JOURNAL of MEDICINE and LIFE.)

Importance: Syphilis is a sexually transmitted infection that can progress through different stages (primary, secondary, latent, and tertiary) and cause serious health problems if left untreated. Reported cases of primary and secondary syphilis in the US increased from a record low of 2.1 cases per 100 000 population in 2000 and 2001 to 11.9 cases per 100 000 population in 2019. Men account for the majority of cases (83% of primary and secondary syphilis cases in 2019), and rates among women nearly tripled from 2015 to 2019., Objective: To reaffirm its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a reaffirmation evidence update focusing on targeted key questions evaluating the performance of risk assessment tools and the benefits and harms of screening for syphilis in nonpregnant adolescents and adults., Population: Asymptomatic, nonpregnant adolescents and adults who have ever been sexually active and are at increased risk for syphilis infection., Evidence Assessment: Using a reaffirmation process, the USPSTF concludes with high certainty that there is a substantial net benefit of screening for syphilis infection in nonpregnant persons who are at increased risk for infection., Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for syphilis infection in persons who are at increased risk for infection. (A recommendation).

Importance: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 210 000 children and adolescents younger than 20 years had diabetes as of 2018; of these, approximately 23 000 had type 2 diabetes. Youth with type 2 diabetes have an increased prevalence of associated chronic comorbid conditions, including hypertension, dyslipidemia, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Data indicate that the incidence of type 2 diabetes is rising; from 2002-2003 to 2014-2015, incidence increased from 9.0 cases per 100 000 children and adolescents to 13.8 cases per 100 000 children and adolescents., Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a review of the evidence on screening for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes in asymptomatic, nonpregnant persons younger than 18 years. This is a new recommendation., Population: Children and adolescents younger than 18 years without known diabetes or prediabetes or symptoms of diabetes or prediabetes., Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for type 2 diabetes in children and adolescents. There is a lack of evidence on the effect of screening for, and early detection and treatment of, type 2 diabetes on health outcomes in youth, and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined., Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for type 2 diabetes in children and adolescents. (I statement).

Objective: To evaluate the clinical value of different combination strategies of high-risk HPV (hr-HPV) testing and Thinprep cytology test (TCT), a cervical cytology test, for cervical cancer screening, especially for high or higher-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL + ) in Shuangliu District, Chengdu City., Methods: The study is a population-based randomized clinical trial. Women aged 35 to 65 years meeting the inclusion criteria were enrolled for the study. At the baseline screening conducted in the first year, the participants were randomly assigned to either cytology test or hr-HPV testing at a ratio of 1∶2. If the paticipants had positive results for the baseline hr-HPV test, they would then undergo either cytology test or colposcopy by random assignment. After 24 months, all participants were called back, and combined screening of cytology test and hr-HPV test were performed. Women who had negative results at baseline screening and who entered and completed the third-year follow-up were selected as the subjects of the study. Based on the aforementioned testing findings, the related data were extracted and four different screening protocols were simulated: 1) combined TCT and hr-HPV screening, with referral for colposcopy when there was positive results for either one of the two; 2) combined TCT and hr-HPV screening, with referral for colposcopy when both tests had positive results at the same time; 3) TCT was done for preliminary screening and those who were found to be positive would then undergo hr-HPV test for triage purpose, with subsequent referral made for colposcopy if the hr-HPV results were positive; 4) hr-HPV was done for preliminary screening and those who were found to be positive would then undergo TCT, with subsequent referral made for colposcopy if TCT results were positive. With the detection of HSIL + on histological examination as the endpoint event, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and area under curve ( AUC ) of different combination screening models were calculated., Results: A total of 3102 women were screened, and 2967 women were included in the statistical analysis in this study. Among the 2967 women, 979 were randomized to cytology and 1988 to hr-HPV genotyping. For prescreening, the positive rate of the cytology group was 5.6% (55/979), with of HSIL + positive rate being 0.2% (2/979), while the positive rate of the hr-HPV group was 7.5% (149/1988), with HSIL + positive rate being 0.9% (18/1988). After 24 months, 2456 women were called back and were given cervical cytology test and hr-HPV test at the same time. Among them, the positive rate of the cytology group was 3.2% (78/2456), while the positive rate of hr-HPV group was 8.7% (215/2456). The overall positive rate of HSIL + was 0.69%(17/2456). Women with a negative baseline hr-HPV had a lower incidence of HSIL + lesions in the long term. The strategy of cervical cytology screening combined with hr-HPV test for triage purpose is the best method, with a sensitivity of 88.9%, a specificity of 58.3%, a PPV of 44.4%, a NPV of 93.3%, and an AUC of 0.736, P =0.039 (95% CI : 0.555-0.917)., Conclusion: This randomized clinical trial from Shuangliu District, Chengdu City shows that the sensitivity of hr-HPV testing is better than that of cytology test, and the prevalence of HSIL + in women with negative baseline hr-HPV results is lower than that of women with negative baseline cytology results. The screening program of TCT for prescreening plus subsequent hr-HPV test for triage purpose shows better value for the detection of HSIL + ., (Copyright© by Editorial Board of Journal of Sichuan University (Medical Sciences).)

This research aimed to investigate the diagnostic effect of computed tomography (CT) images based on a deep learning double residual convolution neural network (DRCNN) model on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and the related risk factors for COPD. The questionnaire survey was conducted among 980 permanent residents aged ≥ 40 years old. Among them, 84 patients who were diagnosed with COPD and volunteered to participate in the experiment and 25 healthy people were selected as the research subjects, and all of them underwent CT imaging scans. At the same time, an image noise reduction model based on the DRCNN was proposed to process CT images. The results showed that 84 of 980 subjects were diagnosed with COPD, and the overall prevalence of COPD in this epidemiological survey was 8.57%. Multivariate logistic regression model analysis showed that the regression coefficients of COPD with age, family history of COPD, and smoking were 0.557, 0.513, and 0.717, respectively ( P < 0.05). The diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of DRCNN-based CT for COPD were greatly superior to those of single CT and the difference was considerable ( P < 0.05). In summary, advanced age, family history of COPD, and smoking were independent risk factors for COPD. CT based on the DRCNN model can improve the diagnostic accuracy of simple CT images for COPD and has good performance in the early screening of COPD., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Changhong Zhang et al.)

Malnutrition, specifically undernutrition, is a significant health concern among older people, yet it is under-detected and under-treated in the community. The causes of malnutrition are complex and multifactorial, and the risk has been exacerbated by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic due to social isolation and loneliness, which can affect older people's appetite and thus reduce their nutritional intake. This article discusses the causes and consequences of malnutrition in older people and describes what is involved in malnutrition screening, person-centred care planning and treatment. The author considers various approaches to overcoming the barriers associated with identifying malnutrition in older people in the community and outlines the role of the nurse in the effective management of malnutrition in this population., Competing Interests: None declared, (© 2022 RCN Publishing Company Ltd. All rights reserved. Not to be copied, transmitted or recorded in any way, in whole or part, without prior permission of the publishers.)

Objectives: Breast cancer screening guidelines could provide valuable tools for clinical decision making by reviewing the available evidence and providing recommendations. Little information is known about how many countries have issued breast cancer screening guidelines and the differences among existing guidelines. We systematically reviewed current guidelines and summarized corresponding recommendations, to provide references for good clinical practice in different countries., Methods: Systematic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus from inception to March 27th, 2021 were conducted and supplemented by reviewing the guideline development organizations. The quality of screening guidelines was assessed from six domains of the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation Ⅱ (AGREE Ⅱ) instrument by two appraisers. The basic information and recommendations of the issued guidelines were extracted and summarized., Results: A total of 23 guidelines issued between 2010 and 2021 in 11 countries or regions were identified for further review. The content and quality varied across the guidelines. The average AGREE Ⅱ scores of the guidelines ranged from 33.3% to 87.5%. The highest domain score was "clarity of presentation" while the domain with the lowest score was "applicability". For average-risk women, most of the guidelines recommended mammographic screening for those aged 40-74 years, specifically, those aged 50-69 years were regarded as the optimal age group for screening. Nine of 23 guidelines recommended against an upper age limit for breast cancer screening. Mammography (MAM) was recommended as the primary screening modality for average-risk women by all included guidelines. Most guidelines suggested annual or biennial mammographic screening. Risk factors of breast cancer identified in the guidelines mainly fell within five categories which could be broadly summarized as the personal history of pre-cancerous lesions and/or breast cancer; the family history of breast cancer; the known genetic predisposition of breast cancer; the history of mantle or chest radiation therapy; and dense breasts. For women at higher risk, there was a consensus among most guidelines that annual MAM or annual magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) should be given, and the screening should begin earlier than the average-risk group., Conclusions: The majority of 23 included international guidelines were issued by developed countries which contained roughly the same but not identical recommendations on breast cancer screening age, methods, and intervals. Most guidelines recommended annual or biennial mammographic screening between 40 and 74 years for average-risk populations and annual MAM or annual MRI starting from a younger age for high-risk populations. Current guidelines varied in quality and increased efforts are needed to improve the methodological quality of guidance documents. Due to lacking clinical practice guidelines tailored to different economic levels, low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) should apply and implement the evidence-based guidelines with higher AGREE Ⅱ scores considering local adaption., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Source Citation: Davidson KW, Barry MJ, Mangione CM, et al. Screening for atrial fibrillation: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2022;327:360-7. 35076659.

Contrary to decreasing incidence rate of colorectal cancer (CRC) in older adults, incidence rates have nearly doubled in younger adults (age <50 years) in the United States since the early 1990s. A similar increase has been observed across the globe. Despite overall population trends in aging, about 15% of CRCs will be diagnosed in younger adults by 2030. The mechanisms and factors contributing to early-onset CRC (EOCRC) remain puzzling, especially because most young adults diagnosed with CRC have no known risk factors or predisposing conditions, such as family history of CRC or polyps or a hereditary syndrome (eg, Lynch syndrome, polyposis). In this up-to-date review, we discuss the current knowledge of EOCRC, including epidemiology, risk factors, clinical and molecular features, treatment and survival, and recognition and screening strategies., Competing Interests: Disclosure C.C. Murphy reports consulting for Freenome., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Two 2013 systematic reviews to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) found insufficient evidence to assess benefits and harms of screening for primary open-angle glaucoma (OAG) in adults., Objective: To update the 2013 reviews on screening for glaucoma, to inform the USPSTF., Data Sources: Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (to February 2021); surveillance through January 21, 2022., Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of screening, referral, and treatment; and studies of screening test diagnostic accuracy., Data Extraction and Synthesis: One investigator abstracted data and a second checked accuracy. Two investigators independently assessed study quality., Results: Eighty-three studies (N = 75 887) were included (30 trials and 53 diagnostic accuracy studies). One RCT (n = 616) found screening of frail elderly persons associated with no difference in vision outcomes vs no screening but with significantly greater falls risk (relative risk [RR], 1.31 [95% CI, 1.13-1.50]). No study evaluated referral to an eye health professional. For glaucoma diagnosis, spectral domain optical coherence tomography (providing high-resolution cross-sectional imaging; 15 studies, n = 4242) was associated with sensitivity of 0.79 (95% CI, 0.75-0.83) and specificity of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.87-0.96) and the Humphrey Visual Field Analyzer (for perimetry, or measurement of visual fields; 6 studies, n = 11 244) with sensitivity of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.69-0.95) and specificity 0.82 (95% CI, 0.66-0.92); tonometry (for measurement of intraocular pressure; 13 studies, n = 32 892) had low sensitivity (0.48 [95% CI, 0.31-0.66]). Medical therapy for ocular hypertension and untreated glaucoma was significantly associated with decreased intraocular pressure and decreased likelihood of glaucoma progression (7 trials, n = 3771; RR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.49-0.96]; absolute risk difference -4.2%) vs placebo, but 1 trial (n = 461) found no differences in visual acuity, quality of life, or function. Selective laser trabeculoplasty and medical therapy had similar outcomes (4 trials, n = 957)., Conclusions and Relevance: This review found limited direct evidence on glaucoma screening, showing no association with benefits. Screening tests can identify persons with glaucoma and treatment was associated with a lower risk of glaucoma progression, but evidence of improvement in visual outcomes, quality of life, and function remains lacking.