<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rdf:RDF
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
 xmlns:prism="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/prism/"
 xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
>

<channel rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com">
<title>Journal of Medical Screening recent issues</title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com</link>
<description>Journal of Medical Screening RSS feed -- recent issues</description>
<prism:eIssn>1475-5793</prism:eIssn>
<prism:publicationName>Journal of Medical Screening</prism:publicationName>
<prism:issn>0969-1413</prism:issn>
<items>
 <rdf:Seq>
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/109?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/112?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/119?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/124?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/131?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/140?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/147?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/155?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/160?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/55?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/60?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/67?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/73?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/81?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/85?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/91?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/98?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/102?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/104?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/106?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/7?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/11?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/17?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/22?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/29?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/33?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/39?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/46?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/48?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/50?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/51?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/52?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/163?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/175?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/182?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/188?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/199?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/204?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/207?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/211?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/213?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/214?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/215?rss=1" />
 </rdf:Seq>
</items>
</channel>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/109?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[What now on screening for prostate cancer?]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/109?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Law, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:53:38 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.009067</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[What now on screening for prostate cancer?]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>111</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>109</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Editorial</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/112?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Ductus venosus pulsatility index as an antenatal screening marker for Down's syndrome: use with the Combined and Integrated tests]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/112?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objectives</st>
<p>To assess the value of ductus venosus blood flow (expressed as pulsatility index, DVPI) in antenatal Down's syndrome screening when used with the Combined and Integrated tests.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>DVPI measurements between 10 and 13 weeks' gestation in 66 Down's syndrome and 7184 unaffected pregnancies were collected from women attending the Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, for antenatal care from 1999 to 2007 and combined with the Serum Urine and Ultrasound Screening Study (SURUSS) data to model screening performance, safety and cost-effectiveness of the screening tests with and without DVPI.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>The median DVPI multiple of the normal median in Down's syndrome pregnancies was 1.55 (95% CI 1.36&ndash;1.73). As a single screening marker without using maternal age, DVPI has a 62% detection rate for a 5% false-positive rate. At a 90% detection rate (first trimester measurements at 11 weeks' gestation) the addition of DVPI reduced the false-positive rate of the Combined test from 8.5% to 4.6% and the Integrated test from 2.0% to 1.1%, with a corresponding reduction in fetal losses from diagnostic procedures. There was no material loss of cost-effectiveness.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Addition of DVPI measurements to the Combined and Integrated tests substantially improves the efficacy and safety of antenatal Down's syndrome screening.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Borrell, A, Borobio, V, Bestwick, J P, Wald, N J]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:53:38 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.009043</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Ductus venosus pulsatility index as an antenatal screening marker for Down's syndrome: use with the Combined and Integrated tests]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>118</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>112</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/119?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Is umbilical cord blood total thyroxin measurement effective in newborn screening for hypothyroidism?]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/119?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objective</st>
<p>To assess the performance of the use of umbilical cord blood for screening of primary congenital hypothyroidism in the Saudi Aramco Medical Services Organization newborn thyroid screening programme.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>Umbilical cord blood total thyroxin (CB-TT4) was measured. In samples with low T4 concentrations, an additional measurement of cord blood thyroid-stimulating hormone was made.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>A total of 96,015 newborn infants were screened in the period January 1990&ndash;December 2007. Twenty-six cases of primary congenital hypothyroidism, six cases of transient hypothyroidism and 13 cases of central hypothyroidism were detected. This method of screening resulted in 100% sensitivity and 98% specificity (95% CI 84&ndash;100, and 95% CI 98&ndash;98.2, respectively). However, there was a high mean recall rate of 1.9%.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>The use of CB-TT4 is a valid screening strategy for primary congenital hypothyroidism. It meets the metabolic screening demands of early discharge policy and guarantees screening all newborns delivered in the hospital.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Abduljabbar, M, Al Shahri, A, Afifi, A]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:53:38 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.009035</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Is umbilical cord blood total thyroxin measurement effective in newborn screening for hypothyroidism?]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>123</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>119</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/124?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The psychological impact of being offered surveillance colonoscopy following attendance at colorectal screening using flexible sigmoidoscopy]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/124?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objectives</st>
<p>To examine the psychological impact of being assigned to colonoscopic surveillance following detection of adenomatous polyps at flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Setting</st>
<p>Participants invited for screening in 12 of the 14 study centres in the UK FS Trial.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>A postal survey following FS screening assessed bowel cancer worry, psychological distress, generalized anxiety, bowel symptoms, general practitioner (GP) visits, positive emotional consequences of screening, and reassurance among people with no polyps (<I>n</I> = 26,573), lower-risk polyps removed at FS (<I>n</I> = 7401) and higher-risk polyps who underwent colonoscopy and were either assigned to colonoscopic surveillance (<I>n</I> = 1543) or discharged (<I>n</I> = 183). A sub-sample (<I>n</I> = 6389) also completed a questionnaire prior to screening attendance that measured bowel cancer worry, generalized anxiety, bowel symptoms and GP visits, making it possible to examine longitudinal changes in this group.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>People offered surveillance reported lower psychological distress and anxiety than those with either no polyps or lower-risk polyps. The surveillance group also reported more positive emotional benefits of screening than the other outcome groups. Post-screening bowel cancer worry and bowel symptoms were higher in people assigned to surveillance, but both declined over time, reaching levels observed in either one or both of the other two groups found to have polyps, suggesting these results were a consequence of polyp detection rather than surveillance <I>per se</I>. Few differences were observed between the group assigned surveillance and the group discharged following colonoscopy.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>The results of the current study are broadly reassuring and indicate that referral for colonoscopic surveillance is not associated with adverse psychological consequences.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Miles, A., Atkin, W. S, Kralj-Hans, I., Wardle, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:53:38 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.009041</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The psychological impact of being offered surveillance colonoscopy following attendance at colorectal screening using flexible sigmoidoscopy]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>130</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>124</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/131?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Comparing interval breast cancer rates in Norway and North Carolina: results and challenges]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/131?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objective</st>
<p>To compare interval breast cancer rates (ICR) between a biennial organized screening programme in Norway and annual opportunistic screening in North Carolina (NC) for different conceptualizations of interval cancer.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Setting</st>
<p>Two regions with different screening practices and performance.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>620,145 subsequent screens (1996&ndash;2002) performed in women aged 50&ndash;69 and 1280 interval cancers were analysed. Various definitions and quantification methods for interval cancers were compared.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>ICR for one year follow-up were lower in Norway compared with NC both when the rate was based on all screens (0.54 versus 1.29 per 1000 screens), negative final assessments (0.54 versus 1.29 per 1000 screens), and negative screening assessments (0.53 versus 1.28 per 1000 screens). The rate of ductal carcinoma <I>in situ</I> was significantly lower in Norway than in NC for cases diagnosed in both the first and second year after screening. The distributions of histopathological tumour size and lymph node involvement in invasive cases did not differ between the two regions for interval cancers diagnosed during the first year after screening. In contrast, in the second year after screening, tumour characteristics remained stable in Norway but became prognostically more favorable in NC.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Even when applying a common set of definitions of interval cancer, the ICR was lower in Norway than in NC. Different definitions of interval cancer did not influence the ICR within Norway or NC. Organization of screening and screening performance might be major contributors to the differences in ICR between Norway and NC.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hofvind, S., Yankaskas, B. C, Bulliard, J.-L., Klabunde, C. N, Fracheboud, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:53:38 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.009012</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Comparing interval breast cancer rates in Norway and North Carolina: results and challenges]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>139</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>131</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/140?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Tumour size at detection according to different measures of mammographic breast density]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/140?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objectives</st>
<p>Breast cancer prognosis is better for smaller tumours. Women with high breast density are at higher risk of breast cancer and have larger screen-detected and interval cancers in mammographic screening programmes. We assess which continuous measures of breast density are the strongest predictors of breast tumour size at detection and therefore the best measures to identify women who might benefit from more intensive mammographic screening or alternative screening strategies.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Setting and methods</st>
<p>We compared the association between breast density and tumour size for 1007 screen-detected and 341 interval cancers diagnosed in an Australian mammographic screening programme between 1994 and 1996, for three semi-automated continuous measures of breast density: <I>per cent density</I>, <I>dense area</I> and <I>dense area</I> <I>adjusted for non-dense area</I>.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>After adjustment for age, hormone therapy use, family history of breast cancer and mode of detection (screen-detected or interval cancers), all measures of breast density shared a similar positive and significant association with tumour size. For example, tumours increased in size with <I>dense area</I> from an estimated mean 2.2 mm larger in the second quintile (<I>&beta;</I> = 2.2; 95% CI 0.4&ndash;3.9, <I>P</I> &lt; 0.001) to mean 6.6 mm larger in the highest decile of <I>dense area</I> (<I>&beta;</I> = 6.6; 95% CI 4.4&ndash;8.9, <I>P</I> &lt; 0.001), when compared with first quintile of breast density.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusions</st>
<p>Of the breast density measures assessed, either <I>dense area</I> or <I>per cent density</I> are suitable measures for identifying women who might benefit from more intensive mammographic screening or alternative screening strategies.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nickson, C., Kavanagh, A. M]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:53:38 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.009054</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Tumour size at detection according to different measures of mammographic breast density]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>146</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>140</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/147?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Carotid ultrasound screening for coronary heart disease: results based on a meta-analysis of 18 studies and 44,861 subjects]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/147?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Background</st>
<p>Carotid artery ultrasound is a possible screening test for future coronary heart disease (CHD) events to select individuals for preventive treatment.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Objectives</st>
<p>To assess the screening performance of carotid artery intima-media thickness (IMT) and carotid plaque in the identification of individuals with CHD.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>Meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies, reporting carotid IMT or plaque in individuals with and without CHD. Screening performance (detection rates [DRs] for specified false-positive rates [FPRs]) was assessed from the relative Gaussian distributions of IMT among individuals with and without CHD and from the proportion of affected and unaffected individuals with plaque.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Eighteen studies, involving 2920 individuals with CHD (mean age range 46&ndash;73 years) and 41,941 without (aged 44&ndash;73 years) were included in the meta-analysis. For plaque the DR was 62% for an FPR of 30%; likelihood ratio (2.1 [95% CI 1.6&ndash;2.4]). For IMT, the DR was 65% for the same 30% FPR (IMT cut-off &ge;0.82 mm); likelihood ratio 2.2 (1.9&ndash;2.5). The results were similar in case-control and cohort studies.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Neither carotid plaque nor IMT has a CHD screening performance that is sufficiently discriminatory between affected and unaffected individuals to be a worthwhile screening test.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Wald, D. S, Bestwick, J. P]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:53:38 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.009038</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Carotid ultrasound screening for coronary heart disease: results based on a meta-analysis of 18 studies and 44,861 subjects]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>154</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>147</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/155?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Combining carotid intima-media thickness with carotid plaque on screening for coronary heart disease]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/155?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Background</st>
<p>Ultrasound-detected carotid artery intima-media thickness (IMT) and carotid plaque are possible screening tests for coronary heart disease (CHD) among asymptomatic individuals.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Objective</st>
<p>To assess the increase in screening performance of combining carotid IMT and plaque compared with each measurement alone in the identification of individuals with CHD.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>Ultrasound examination of left and right carotid arteries was performed on 100 individuals (median age 57), 55 with a history of CHD (unstable angina or myocardial infarction) and 45 without. IMT measurements were taken from the common carotid artery and plaque was identified above, at and below the carotid bifurcation. Associations between IMT and plaque were determined using logistic regression, and screening performance was assessed from the distributions of IMT and plaque among cases and controls.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>At a false-positive rate of 5%, IMT (cut-off &gt;0.75 mm) identified 30% (95% CI 14&ndash;58) of affected individuals. There was an increase in the detection rate of 8 percentage points (1&ndash;33%) using IMT and plaque combined compared with IMT alone. As the false-positive increased, the difference in the detection rate increased, up to a maximum of 20 percentage points (5&ndash;38%) at a false-positive rate of 20%. The comparison of IMT and plaque combined with plaque alone could only be estimated for the false-positive rate observed using plaque alone (18%); at this point the detection rate was 72% for plaque and 75% for plaque and IMT combined, an increase of 3 percentage points (0&ndash;4%).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>In screening for CHD, combining carotid IMT measurement with plaque assessment is better than using either measurement alone, but the improvement in discrimination is not sufficient to make carotid ultrasound screening for CHD worthwhile.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Wald, D. S, Bestwick, J. P, Morton, G., Drummond, L., Jenkins, N., Khodabakhsh, P., Curzen, N. P]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:53:38 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.009039</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Combining carotid intima-media thickness with carotid plaque on screening for coronary heart disease]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>159</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>155</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/160?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH RESEARCH (NIHR) HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT (HTA) PROGRAMME]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/3/160?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:53:38 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.163hta</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH RESEARCH (NIHR) HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT (HTA) PROGRAMME]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>162</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>160</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Miscellanea</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/55?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The ability of the quadruple test to predict adverse perinatal outcomes in a high-risk obstetric population]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/55?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objective</st>
<p>To determine the ability of the quadruple Down's syndrome screening test (quad screen) to predict other adverse perinatal outcomes (APO) in a high-risk obstetric population.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Setting</st>
<p>A tertiary medical centre in West Virginia.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>We retrospectively reviewed 342 obstetric patients with quad screen data from a single clinic. The quad screen included maternal serum levels of alphafetoprotein (AFP), human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), uncongjugated oestriol (uE<SUB>3</SUB>), and inhibin A. The risk of APO was compared between patients with at least one abnormal marker versus no abnormal markers and &ge;2 abnormal markers versus &lt;2 abnormal markers. Abnormal markers were determined by cut-off values produced by Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curves and the FASTER trial. Unadjusted and adjusted effects were estimated using logistic regression analysis.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>The risk of having an APO increased significantly for patients with abnormal markers by about three-fold using ROC and two-fold using FASTER trial thresholds.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusions</st>
<p>The quad screen shows value in predicting risk of APO in high-risk patients.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lao, M. R, Calhoun, B. C, Bracero, L. A, Wang, Y., Seybold, D. J, Broce, M., Hatjis, C. G]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:08:42 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.009017</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The ability of the quadruple test to predict adverse perinatal outcomes in a high-risk obstetric population]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>59</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>55</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/60?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Demographic variations in HIV testing history among emergency department patients: implications for HIV screening in US emergency departments]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/60?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objective</st>
<p>To determine the proportion of emergency department (ED) patients who have been tested for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and assess if patient history of HIV testing varies according to patient demographic characteristics.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Design</st>
<p>From July 2005&ndash;July 2006, a random sample of 18&ndash;55-year-old English-speaking patients being treated for sub-critical injury or illness at a northeastern US ED were interviewed on their history of HIV testing. Logistic regression models were created to compare patients by their history of being tested for HIV according to their demography. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Of 2107 patients surveyed who were not known to be HIV-infected, the median age was 32 years; 54% were male, 71% were white, and 45% were single/never married; 49% had private health-care insurance and 45% had never been tested for HIV. Of the 946 never previously tested for HIV, 56.1% did not consider themselves at risk for HIV. In multivariable logistic regression analyses, those less likely to have been HIV tested were male (OR: 1.32 [1.37&ndash;2.73]), white (OR: 1.93 [1.37&ndash;2.73]), married (OR: 1.53 [1.12&ndash;2.08]), and had private health-care insurance (OR: 2.10 [1.69&ndash;2.61]). There was a U-shaped relationship between age and history of being tested for HIV; younger and older patients were less likely to have been tested. History of HIV testing and years of formal education were not related.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Almost half of ED patients surveyed had never been tested for HIV. Certain demographic groups are being missed though HIV diagnostic testing and screening programmes in other settings. These groups could potentially be reached through universal screening.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Merchant, R. C, Catanzaro, B. M, Seage, G. R, Mayer, K. H, Clark, M. A, DeGruttola, V. G, Becker, B. M]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:08:42 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.008058</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Demographic variations in HIV testing history among emergency department patients: implications for HIV screening in US emergency departments]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>66</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>60</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/67?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[League tables of breast cancer screening units: worst-case and best-case scenario ratings helped in exposing real differences between performance ratings]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/67?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objectives</st>
<p>Data on the performance of health boards, hospitals and medical specialists, etc., are being collected at various levels in the health-care system and are often presented as league tables. These tables ignore natural variation and/or confounders, and this introduces uncertainty about their interpretation. The purpose of this study was to devise and illustrate a method to expose the real difference between the ratings in league tables.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>Two values per rating were added to the league tables: the best-case scenario and the worst-case scenario. True performance will lie somewhere between these two values. The method is illustrated using data from the Dutch breast cancer screening programme.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>By focusing on one performance indicator and one confounder, it was possible to show shifts in the rating order of breast cancer screening units and thus expose the uncertainty about the true performance of each screening unit.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusions</st>
<p>The worst-case and best-case scenario ratings demonstrated the uncertainty within the ratings of a league table. League tables should therefore only be used with great caution and after providing the public with sufficient information.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lemmers, O., Broeders, M., Verbeek, A., Heeten, G. d., Holland, R., Borm, G. F]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:08:42 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.008093</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[League tables of breast cancer screening units: worst-case and best-case scenario ratings helped in exposing real differences between performance ratings]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>72</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>67</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/73?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Differences in endpoints between the Swedish W-E (two county) trial of mammographic screening and the Swedish overview: methodological consequences]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/73?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objectives</st>
<p>To characterize and quantify the differences in the number of cases and breast cancer deaths in the Swedish W-E Trial compared with the Swedish Overview Committee (OVC) summaries and to study methodological issues related to trials in secondary prevention.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Setting</st>
<p>The study population of the W-E Trial of mammography screening was included in the first (W and E county) and the second (E-county) OVC summary of all Swedish randomized mammography screening trials. The OVC and the W-E Trial used different criteria for case definition and causes of death determination.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Method</st>
<p>A Review Committee compared the original data files from W and E county and the first and second OVC. The reason for a discrepancy was determined individually for all non-concordant cases or breast cancer deaths.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Of the 2615 cases included by the W-E Trial or the OVC, there were 478 (18%) disagreements. Of the disagreements 82% were due to inclusion/exclusion criteria, and 18% to disagreement with respect to cause of death or vital status at ascertainment. For E-County, the OVC inclusion rules and register based determination of cause of death (second OVC) rather than individual case review (W-E Trial and 1st OVC) resulted in a reduction of the estimate of the effect of screening, but for W-County the difference between the original trial and the OVC was modest.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusions</st>
<p>The conclusion that invitation to mammography screening reduces breast cancer mortality remains robust. Disagreements were mainly due to study design issues, while disagreements about cause of death were a minority. When secondary research does not adhere to the protocols of the primary research projects, the consequences of such design differences should be investigated and reported. Register linkage of trials can add follow-up information. The precision of trials with modest size is enhanced by individual monitoring of case status and outcome status such as determination of cause of death.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Holmberg, L, Duffy, S W, Yen, A M F, Tabar, L, Vitak, B, Nystrom, L, Frisell, J]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:08:42 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.008103</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Differences in endpoints between the Swedish W-E (two county) trial of mammographic screening and the Swedish overview: methodological consequences]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>80</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>73</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/81?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Invitation management initiative to improve uptake of breast cancer screening in an urban UK Primary Care Trust]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/81?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objectives</st>
<p>In an attempt to improve breast cancer screening uptake and coverage, persistent non-attenders in the Heart of Birmingham Teaching Primary Care Trust were included in an invitation management initiative.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>Persistent non-attenders were identified in routine screening lists. Phone contact was attempted or a home visit was made. If the case was not resolved, a second appointment was made and further phone calls and home visits were attempted.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Of 548 persistent non-attenders identified, 228 (42%) declined screening, 171 (31%) attended, 72 (13%) had moved away or died, 11 (2%) were recently screened or under care for other conditions. Sixty-six cases (12%) remained unresolved. Fourteen women opted to be permanently withdrawn from the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP). Twenty-four women had a negative experience of breast cancer screening (defaulted, recalled for assessment, recalled for technical reasons). No malignancies were found. A total of 1375 phone calls and 230 home visits were attempted. Uptake would have been 62.2% if none of the persistent non-attenders included in the initiative had attended for screening. With the initiative, uptake of breast cancer screening was increased to 65.3%.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusions</st>
<p>Phone calls and home visits resulted in only a moderate increase in breast cancer screening uptake. The initiative encouraged nervous attenders who were reassured about the screening process. However, more women declined screening than were screened and the initiative made it easier for women to request to be permanently withdrawn from the NHSBSP.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kearins, O., Walton, J., O'Sullivan, E., Lawrence, G.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:08:42 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.009006</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Invitation management initiative to improve uptake of breast cancer screening in an urban UK Primary Care Trust]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>84</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>81</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/85?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Variation in the cervical cancer screening compliance among women with disability]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/85?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objective</st>
<p>To investigate the relationship between the level of disability and regular Pap smear testing among women in Taiwan and explore how this relationship may vary with the various levels of physician availability.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>This population-based cohort study followed a total of 5,469,581 women from Taiwan, who were 30 years old or older in 2001 and covered the period January 2001 to December 2003. Of the total study population, 184,701 individuals were women with disability. Gynecologist-obstetrician/general practitioner to female population ratio was used as an indicator of physician availability. Multiple logistical regression models were used.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>After adjusting for age, socioeconomic status, racial group, residence area and physician availability, women with severe disability (OR = 0.38; 95% CI: 0.38, 0.39) were the least likely to undergo Pap smear testing. Women with moderate disability (OR = 0.59; 95% CI: 0.58, 0.60) and mild disability (OR = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.86, 0.89) were also significantly less likely to undergo a routine test than women without disability. Women residing in the areas with the greatest physician availability (OR = 0.93; 95% CI: 0.93, 0.94) were significantly less likely to undergo a Pap test than those in the areas with the lowest level of resource availability. The disparity in routine screening between women with and without disability remained across the different levels of physician availability.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusions</st>
<p>In Taiwan, women with disability were found to be at higher risk of lower compliance than women without disability. The gap between women with and without disability persisted across different levels of physician availability.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chen, L.-S., Chou, Y.-J., Tsay, J.-H., Lee, C.-H., Chou, P., Huang, N.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:08:42 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.008061</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Variation in the cervical cancer screening compliance among women with disability]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>90</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>85</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/91?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Validity of self-reported Pap smear history in Norwegian women]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/91?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objectives</st>
<p>To assess the validity of self-reported Papanicolau (Pap) smear history in Norwegian women and to identify characteristics that influence the validity.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>Interview data from a sample of 16,574 Norwegian women, aged 18&ndash;45, in 2004&ndash;2005, was compared with information from the population-based cytology register. Crude validity in the self-reports with respect to ever/never having taken a Pap smear was summarized. The validity of the reported interval since last Pap smear was assessed by a smoothed distribution of the reported interval, stratified by the registered interval. Characteristics of influence on validity were identified by logistic regression for true positives (<I>sensitivity</I> and <I>positive predictive value</I>), true negatives (<I>specificity</I> and <I>negative predictive value</I>) and for more than one year discrepancy in time since last Pap smear, between reported and registered interval.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Overall validity was summarized by: <I>concordance</I> = 0.9, <I>sensitivity</I> = 0.97, <I>positive predictive value</I> = 0.92, <I>specificity</I> = 0.55, <I>negative predictive value</I> = 0.78 and <I>report-to-records ratio</I> = 1.51. The variance in the reported interval increased proportionally with the registered interval, and women tended to underestimate the interval (telescoping). Age and registered number of years since last Pap smear had the strongest influence on ever/never and time interval validity, respectively.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusions</st>
<p>Estimated screening rates, based on self-reporting without organized screening, are biased. Telescoping leads to increased risk for developing invasive disease, because women will postpone their next Pap smear.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Klungsoyr, O., Nygard, M., Skare, G., Eriksen, T., Nygard, J. F]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:08:42 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.008087</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Validity of self-reported Pap smear history in Norwegian women]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>97</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>91</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/98?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Stage shift in PSA-detected prostate cancers - effect modification by Gleason score]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/98?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objective</st>
<p>This paper aims to investigate whether the stage shift (where more cancers are detected at an earlier stage) in prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-detected cancers differs by Gleason score.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>Between 2002 and 2005, 1514 men aged 50&ndash;69 years were identified with prostate cancer following community-based PSA testing as part of the ProtecT study. In the same period, 2021 men aged 50&ndash;69 years with clinically diagnosed prostate cancer were registered at a population-based cancer registry in the East of England. Using logistic regression analysis and controlling for age, the odds ratio (OR) for advanced stage (TNM stage T3 and above) prostate cancer among the PSA-detected group was compared with the clinically diagnosed tumours. The evidence that stage shift differs by Gleason score was assessed using the likelihood ratio test for interaction.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Advanced stage disease among the PSA-detected cancers was less common than among the clinically detected cancers (OR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.39&ndash;0.56). PSA-detected tumours had a substantial shift to earlier-stage disease where the Gleason score was &lt;7 (OR = 0.52; 95% CI 0.36&ndash;0.77, <I>P</I> &lt; 0.001) but showed no such shift where the Gleason score was 7 or more (OR = 0.84; 95% CI 0.66&ndash;1.07, <I>P</I> = 0.1). There was evidence of interaction between detection mode and Gleason score (<I>P</I> = 0.03).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>The observed stage shift could be partially explained by length bias or overdiagnosis. These findings may have implications on understanding pathways of prostate cancer progression and on identifying potential targets for screening, pending further investigation of complexities of associations between PSA testing, Gleason score, and stage.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pashayan, N., Pharoah, P., Neal, D. E, Hamdy, F., Donovan, J., Martin, R. M, Greenberg, D., Duffy, S. W]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:08:42 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.009037</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Stage shift in PSA-detected prostate cancers - effect modification by Gleason score]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>101</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>98</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/102?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Adjustment of serum markers in first trimester screening]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/102?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>First trimester combined screening can be performed using maternal serum pregnancy-associated plasma protein A, total human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) and ultrasound measurement of nuchal translucency at 11&ndash;13 weeks of pregnancy. Our objective was to explore the effects of covariates on total hCG in the first trimester. First trimester total hCG levels were significantly increased in twins (median = 1.87 MoM), mildly increased in pregnancies achieved by <I>in vitro</I> fertilization (1.04 MoM) and decreased in smokers (0.80 MoM).</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lambert-Messerlian, G., Palomaki, G. E, Canick, J. A]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:08:42 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.009028</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Adjustment of serum markers in first trimester screening]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>103</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>102</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Short Communication</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/104?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Erratum]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/104?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Schindeler, S., Stephen, M., Yeqin, Z., Deborah, B.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:08:42 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.009004</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Erratum]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>105</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>104</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Miscellanea</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/106?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH RESEARCH (NIHR) HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT (HTA) PROGRAMME]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/2/106?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:08:42 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.162hta</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH RESEARCH (NIHR) HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT (HTA) PROGRAMME]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>108</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>106</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Miscellanea</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Rubella seroprevalence in pregnant women in North Thames: estimates based on newborn screening samples]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objectives</st>
<p>Routine screening for rubella susceptibility is recommended in the UK so that women found to be susceptible can be offered immunization in the post partum period. We demonstrate the use of newborn dried blood spot samples linked to routine vital statistics datasets to monitor rubella susceptibility in pregnant women and to investigate maternal characteristics as determinants of rubella seronegativity.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Setting</st>
<p>North Thames region of England (including large parts of inner London).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>Maternally acquired rubella IgG antibody levels were measured in 18882 newborn screening blood spot samples. Latent class regression finite mixture models were used to classify samples as seronegative to rubella. Data on maternal country of birth were available through linkage to birth registration data.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>An estimated 2.7% (95% CI 2.4%&ndash;3.0%) of newly delivered women in North Thames were found to be seronegative. Mothers born abroad, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, were more likely to be seronegative than UK-born mothers, with adjusted odds ratios of 4.2 (95% CI 3.1&ndash;5.6) and 5.0 (3.8&ndash;6.5), respectively. Mothers under 20 years were more likely to be seronegative than those aged 30 to 34.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Our findings highlight the need for vaccination to be targeted specifically at migrant women and their families to ensure that they are protected from rubella in pregnancy and its serious consequences.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hardelid, P, Cortina-Borja, M, Williams, D, Tookey, P A, Peckham, C S, Cubitt, W D, Dezateux, C]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 12:25:56 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.008080</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Rubella seroprevalence in pregnant women in North Thames: estimates based on newborn screening samples]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>6</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>1</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/7?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Antenatal screening for Down's syndrome using the Integrated test at two London hospitals]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/7?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>We carried out an audit of antenatal screening for Down's syndrome using the Integrated test (which provides a single screening result from information collected in the late first and early second trimesters of pregnancy) which was introduced into routine antenatal care at two London hospitals, University College Hospital (UCH) and St Mary's Hospital, in 2003&ndash;4. The audit was based on 15,888 women who accepted screening and booked in the first trimester. The Down's syndrome detection rate was 87% (95% confidence interval [CI], 74&ndash;95) consistent with an expected detection rate of 89% based on applying the estimates of screening performance of the Serum, Urine and Ultrasound Screening Study (SURUSS) to the maternal age distribution of women who were screened at UCH and St Mary's. The observed false-positive rate was 2.1% (95% CI, 1.9&ndash;2.3), compared with an expected of 2.5% for women of the same age. An audit trail (conducted at UCH) indicated that 98% (10,746/10,961) of women accepted integrated screening (2% having a first trimester test) and of these, 94% (10,116) completed both stages of the test. The audit demonstrated that it is feasible to conduct integrated screening within the NHS with a high acceptance rate and a screening performance consistent with that determined from previous research studies.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Wald, N J, Huttly, W J, Murphy, K W, Ali, K, Bestwick, J P, Rodeck, C H]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 12:25:56 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.008094</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Antenatal screening for Down's syndrome using the Integrated test at two London hospitals]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>10</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>7</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/11?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Permanent and transient congenital hypothyroidism in Isfahan-Iran]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/11?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objectives</st>
<p>To determine the prevalence of permanent and transient congenital hypothyroidism (CH) in Isfahan, Iran.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>In 256 primarily diagnosed CH patients identified through the neonatal screening programme from May 2002 to February 2005, treatment was discontinued for 4 weeks and T4 and thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) were measured. Permanent or transient CH was determined from the results of the thyroid function tests and the radiologic findings. Patients with TSH levels &gt;6 (mIU/l) were diagnosed with permanent CH.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Results were available from 204 patients, of whom 122 patients were diagnosed with permanent CH (59.8%) (prevalence 1:748 births), and 82 with transient hypothyroidism (prevalence 1:1114). Permanent CH was associated with higher initial TSH levels than transient hypothyroidism (P &lt; 0.05). The most common aetiology of CH was dyshormonogenesis.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>The rates of both permanent and transient CH in our study were higher than the comparable worldwide rates. The transient group had low T4 levels, suggesting that iodine contamination should be investigated. The aetiology of CH was also different from that recorded in many other studies.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hashemipour, M., Hovsepian, S., Kelishadi, R., Iranpour, R., Hadian, R., Haghighi, S., Gharapetian, A., Talaei, M., Amini, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 12:25:56 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.008090</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Permanent and transient congenital hypothyroidism in Isfahan-Iran]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>16</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>11</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/17?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Evaluation of unilateral referrals on neonatal hearing screening]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/17?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objective</st>
<p>Examination of neonatal hearing screening practices around the world suggests that more attention is placed on infants who fail bilaterally on their hearing screen than infants who refer (fail) in one ear. Some programmes only report bilateral failures as positive hearing screens. This study investigates how limitations of the screening techniques demand continued audiologic evaluations in unilateral referrals.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Setting</st>
<p>The study sample consisted of all infants born at a single academic paediatric hospital between February 1998 and February 2002.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>There were 16,007 infants screened using ALGO automated auditory brainstem response. Eighteen of the infants who failed the screen in one ear but passed in the other ear were found to have permanent hearing loss, and had their subsequent clinical course and audiologic management analysed. The final audiologic outcome after four years in both the pass and fail ear were examined.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>One group of unilateral referrals (n = 6) had obvious anatomic reasons for the ear failing the screen (canal atresia/stenosis). There were five patients in which the ear that passed the screen was later found on more extensive audiologic evaluation to have significant hearing loss. Review of recent literature was also completed to examine the methods by which unilateral screening referrals are commonly reported and whether or not this affected follow-up diagnostic evaluation.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Infants who pass one ear and refer one ear on neonatal hearing screening still need to have thorough and prompt evaluations. In many cases, the ear that passed can be found to have significant hearing loss.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chang, K. W, O-Lee, T J, Price, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 12:25:56 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.007113</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Evaluation of unilateral referrals on neonatal hearing screening]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>21</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>17</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/22?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Premarital screening programmes for haemoglobinopathies, HIV and hepatitis viruses: review and factors affecting their success]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/22?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This literature review is a comprehensive summary of premarital (prenuptial) screening programmes for the most prevalent hereditary haemoglobinopathies, namely thalassaemia and sickle cell disease, and the important infections HIV (human immunodeficiency virus) and hepatitis viruses B and C (HBV and HCV). It describes the background to premarital screening programmes and their value in countries where these diseases are endemic. The use of premarital screening worldwide is critically evaluated, including recent experiences in Saudi Arabia, followed by discussion of the outcomes of such programmes. Despite its many benefits, premarital testing is not acceptable in some communities for various legal and religious reasons, and other educational and cultural factors may prevent some married couples following the advice given by counsellors. The success of these programmes therefore depends on adequate religious support, government policy, education and counselling. In contrast to premarital screening for haemoglobinopathies, premarital screening for HIV and the hepatitis viruses is still highly controversial, both in terms of ethics and cost-effectiveness. In wealthy countries, premarital hepatitis and HIV testing could become mandatory if at-risk, high-prevalence populations are clearly identified and all ethical issues are adequately addressed.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Alswaidi, F. M, O'Brien, S. J]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 12:25:56 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2008.008029</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Premarital screening programmes for haemoglobinopathies, HIV and hepatitis viruses: review and factors affecting their success]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>28</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>22</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/29?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Comparison of emergency department HIV testing data with visit or patient as the unit of analysis]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/29?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objectives</st>
<p>Outcomes in an episodic care setting like an emergency department (ED) are traditionally evaluated in comparison with the number of visits as opposed to the number of unique patients, although patients commonly present to the ED multiple times. We examined the differences in HIV screening programme outcomes that would occur if the analysis were conducted at the patient-level, rather than the traditional visit-level. We hypothesized that while our ED-based HIV screening programme does test some patients repeatedly, the primary programme outcome of percent positive is not substantially altered by the unit of analysis.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>We reviewed the clinical database of an ED HIV screening programme at a large, urban, teaching hospital in the United States from 2003&ndash;2007. Data were analyzed descriptively. The main outcome measure was the rate of positive test results computed with either the visit or the patient as the unit of analysis.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>HIV testing was provided at 9629 visits, representing 8450 unique patients. For patient-level analysis, the proportion of patients found to be positive was 0.91%. For visit-level analysis, the proportion of tests with positive results was 0.83%. Of the 910 patients with repeat testing, 7 (0.77%) were identified as positive at a repeat test. The median time between tests was 383 days (range 1&ndash;1742).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusions</st>
<p>Results changed little regardless of whether unique patients or unique visits were used as the unit of analysis. Any differences in positive rates were mitigated by the contribution of repeat testing to the identification of newly infected patients. Given these findings, and the difficulty of tracking repeat testing over time, visit-level analysis are appropriate for comparing programme outcomes when detailed modeling of epidemiology, cost, and/or outcomes is not required.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lyons, M. S, Lindsell, C. J, Raab, D. L, Ruffner, A. H, Trott, A. T, Fichtenbaum, C. J]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 12:25:56 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.008086</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Comparison of emergency department HIV testing data with visit or patient as the unit of analysis]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>32</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>29</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/33?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Willingness to undergo colorectal cancer screening in first-degree relatives of hospitalized patients with colorectal cancer]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/33?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Aims</st>
<p>To evaluate whether willingness to undergo colonoscopy screening is influenced by being a first-degree relative of hospitalized patients with or without colorectal cancer after briefing and surgeon recommendation.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>We performed a cross-sectional study of 327 first-degree relatives of hospitalized patients aged higher than 40 years, divided into Group A (151 relatives of colorectal cancer patients) and Group B (176 relatives of non-cancer patients) at the University Hospital of the Canary Islands, Spain. All were personally briefed by a surgeon, aided by a colorectal cancer pamphlet, and encouraged to accept screening colonoscopy with sedation.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Willingness to undergo colonoscopy screening was greater in Group A (66.9%) than in Group B (29.0%); (odds ratio: 11.1; 95% confidence interval = 4.27 to 29.14; <I>P</I> &lt; 0.001). Pre-briefing awareness of screening colonoscopy was also significantly higher in Group A (76.8% vs. 33.5%; <I>P</I> &lt; 0.001), the main source of information being a close relative with colorectal cancer.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusions</st>
<p>Being a close relative of a colorectal cancer patient is positively related with willingness to undergo colonoscopy screening in this study. This cross-sectional study outlines a strategy for increasing the level of willingness to undergo colorectal cancer screening in a group of people at risk.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Delgado-Plasencia, L, Lopez-Tomassetti-Fernandez, E, Hernandez-Morales, A, Torres-Monzon, E, Gonzalez-Hermoso, F]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 12:25:56 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.008062</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Willingness to undergo colorectal cancer screening in first-degree relatives of hospitalized patients with colorectal cancer]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>38</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>33</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/39?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Interval cancer incidence and episode sensitivity in the Norrbotten Mammography Screening Programme, Sweden]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/39?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objectives</st>
<p>To estimate the interval cancer incidence, its determinants and the episode sensitivity in the Norrbotten Mammography Screening Programme (NMSP).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Setting</st>
<p>Since 1989, women aged 40&ndash;74 years (n = 55,000) have been invited to biennial screening by the NMSP, Norrbotten county, Sweden.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>Data on 1047 invasive breast cancers from six screening rounds of the NMSP (1989&ndash;2002) were collected. We estimated the invasive interval cancer rates, rate ratios and the episode sensitivity using the detection and incidence methods. A linear Poisson-model was used to analyse association between interval cancer incidence and sensitivity.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>768 screen-detected and 279 interval cancer cases were identified. The rate ratio of interval cancer decreased with age. The 50&ndash;59 year age group showed the highest rate ratio (RR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.41&ndash;0.65) and the 70&ndash;74 year age group the lowest (RR = 0.23, 95% CI 0.15&ndash;0.36). The rate ratios for the early (0&ndash;12 months) and late (13&ndash;24 months) interval cancers were similar (RR = 0.18, 95% CI 0.15&ndash;0.22 and 0.20, 95% CI 0.17&ndash;0.24). There was a significantly lower interval cancer incidence in the prevalence round as compared with the incidence rounds. According to the detection method the episode sensitivity increased with age from 57% in the age group 40&ndash;49 years to 84% in the age group 70&ndash;74 years. The corresponding figures for the incidence method were 50% and 77%, respectively.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Our study showed an interval cancer incidence of 38% and the episode sensitivity of 62&ndash;73%, depending on the method of calculation. Our results are of clinically acceptable level and concert with the reference values of the European guidelines.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bordas, P., Jonsson, H., Nystrom, L., Lenner, P.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 12:25:56 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.008098</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Interval cancer incidence and episode sensitivity in the Norrbotten Mammography Screening Programme, Sweden]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>45</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>39</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/46?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Evaluation of four years of prenatal screening for aneuploidies in Hospital S. Francisco Xavier using the integrated test]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/46?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>We report an audit of our Prenatal Screening Programme for aneuploidies between March 2003 and August 2007. Overall detection and false positive rates were 86% and 3.6%, respectively. These results are similar to those predicted by the Serum, Urine and Ultrasound Screening Study (SURUSS).</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rodrigues, L. C., Ramos-Dias, A. M., Carvalho, V., Cirurgiao, F.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 12:25:56 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.009019</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Evaluation of four years of prenatal screening for aneuploidies in Hospital S. Francisco Xavier using the integrated test]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>47</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>46</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Short Communication</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/48?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Five cases of triploidy identified through antenatal screening programme]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/48?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Liao, C., Li, D.-Z.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 12:25:56 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2008.008097</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Five cases of triploidy identified through antenatal screening programme]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>49</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>48</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Letter to the Editor</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/50?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[On testing independence of repeated screening tests]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/50?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Xu, J.-L., Prorok, P. C]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 12:25:56 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.008099</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[On testing independence of repeated screening tests]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>50</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>50</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Letters</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/51?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Response to Xu and Prorok]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/51?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Njor, S. H, Lynge, E.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 12:25:56 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.009010</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Response to Xu and Prorok]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>51</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>51</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Letters</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/52?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/16/1/52?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 12:25:56 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2009.161hta</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>16</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>54</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>52</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Miscellaneous</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/163?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Predicting the impact of the screening programme for colorectal cancer in the UK]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/163?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objectives</st>
<p>Screening for colorectal cancer by biennial testing for faecal occult blood is being introduced in the UK from 2007. We examine the likely impact of the programme, in terms of reduced mortality, lives saved and changes in incidence, over the next 20 years.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Setting</st>
<p>Projections of incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer in England, and the policy that has been adopted for screening in England (biennial at ages 60&ndash;69 from 2007, then 60&ndash;74 in 2010).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>The results are based on the output of a simulation model that has been used to examine cost-effectiveness of screening policy options, with two scenarios regarding compliance with screening; both assume that 20% of the population will never attend for screening, but attendance of those who do is modelled either as a random 60% or 80%, at each screening round.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>The decrease in mortality rates expected 20 years after introducing screening is 13&ndash;17% in men and 12&ndash;15% in women (depending on the attendance levels). The model predicts an initial rise in incidence, followed (after six to seven years) by a fall, so that there is little net change in the number of cases detected over a 20-year period.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Percentage changes in mortality seem modest, but the projected saving in terms of numbers of lives is not negligible &ndash; 1800&ndash;2400 per year by 2025 in England (equivalent numbers are 2200&ndash;2700 in all over the UK). Newer screening modalities may improve on these projected results.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Parkin, D M, Tappenden, P, Olsen, A H, Patnick, J, Sasieni, P]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:15:26 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2008.008024</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Predicting the impact of the screening programme for colorectal cancer in the UK]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>174</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>163</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/175?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Cost evaluation in a colorectal cancer screening programme by faecal occult blood test in the District of Florence]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/175?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objectives</st>
<p>To evaluate the direct costs of first and repeat colorectal cancer screening by immunochemical faecal occult blood testing (I-FOBT).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>Florence district residents aged 50&ndash;70 were invited to undergo one-time I-FOBT every two years. Full colonoscopy was recommended for FOBT-positive subjects. Direct cost analysis was carried out separately for the first and repeat screening. All relevant resources consumed by the programme were calculated.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Among 25,428 or 62,369 subjects invited to the first or repeat screening, respectively, the corresponding participation rate was 47.8% or 52.3%, and the positivity rate was 4.4% and 3.3%. Corresponding detection rates and positive predictive values for cancer and advanced adenoma were 11.3% or 8.9% and 32.4% or 32.8%, respectively. The assessment phase accounted for the major cost, as compared with recruitment and screening. All cost indicators were slightly higher in the first screening compared with repeat screening. Cost per cancer and advanced adenoma detected was similar in the first or repeat screening. A higher than observed participation rate would have substantially reduced screening cost.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Analysis of I-FOBT-organized population-based screening cost demonstrates lower cost at repeat compared with first screening and provides reference for decision-making in screening implementation.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Grazzini, G., Ciatto, S., Cislaghi, C., Castiglione, G., Falcone, M., Mantellini, P., Zappa, M., The Working Group of Regional Reference Centre for Oncological Screening of Tuscany]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:15:26 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2008.008032</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Cost evaluation in a colorectal cancer screening programme by faecal occult blood test in the District of Florence]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>181</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>175</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/182?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Impact of changing from annual to biennial mammographic screening on breast cancer outcomes in women aged 50-79 in British Columbia]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/182?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objectives</st>
<p>The objective of this study was to compare breast cancer outcomes among women subject to different policies on mammography screening frequency.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Setting</st>
<p>Data were obtained for women participating in the Screening Mammography Programme of British Columbia (SMPBC) for 1988&ndash;2005. The SMPBC changed its policy for women aged 50&ndash;79 years from annual to biennial mammography in 1997, but retained an annual recommendation for women aged 40&ndash;49 years.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>Breast cancer outcomes were compared for women participating in the programme before and after 1997 for two groups: ages 40&ndash;49 and 50&ndash;79 years.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>There were data on 658,151 women. Comparing pre-1997 and post-1997, the median interscreen interval increased by 11.1 months in women 50&ndash;79 but by only 0.3 months in women aged 40&ndash;49. Excluding those detected at initial screen, 6291 breast cancers were identified. Comparing pre-1997 and post-1997: the relative rates (RR) of screen detected cancer increased in women aged 40&ndash;49 (RR = 1.32) and the rate of invasive cancers &ge;20 mm at diagnosis decreased (RR = 0.83); the rate of cancers with axillary node involvement increased in women aged 50&ndash;79 (RR = 1.23). Cancer survival improved after 1997 for women diagnosed at ages 40&ndash;49 (hazard ratio = 0.62), but was unchanged for women aged 50&ndash;79. Breast cancer mortality rates did not change between the periods in either age group.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>The proximal cancer outcomes considered (staging and survival) improved in women aged 40&ndash;49 but this was offset in women aged 50&ndash;79 associated with the change in screen frequency. These changes did not result in alterations in breast cancer mortality rates in either age group.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Coldman, A. J, Phillips, N., Olivotto, I. A, Gordon, P., Warren, L., Kan, L.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:15:26 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2008.008064</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Impact of changing from annual to biennial mammographic screening on breast cancer outcomes in women aged 50-79 in British Columbia]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>187</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>182</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/188?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Normal endometrial cells in cervical cytology: systematic review of prevalence and relation to significant endometrial pathology]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/188?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objectives</st>
<p>To estimate the prevalence of normal endometrial cells (NECs) and the proportion of NECs associated with significant endometrial pathology in conventional and liquid-based cytology (LBC) cervical smears; and to assess the association between NECs and clinical symptoms in women with endometrial hyperplasia or carcinoma.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>Systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of prevalence and proportion data. The review was confined to studies reporting on NECs in smears from postmenopausal women or women aged 40+.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>A total of 22 relevant primary studies were identified from 1970 to 2007. The overall summary estimate for the prevalence of NECs in smears from postmenopausal women or women aged 40+ in all screening smears was 0.4% (95% CI 0.2&ndash;0.7%); this was 0.3% (95% CI 0.1&ndash;0.5%) and 0.9% (95% CI 0.5&ndash;1.4%) for conventional and LBC smears, respectively; <I>P</I> = 0.003 for difference. The overall estimate for the proportion of NECs associated with significant endometrial pathology was 7% (95% CI 4&ndash;10%); this was 11% (95% CI 8&ndash;14%) and 2% (95% CI 1&ndash;2%) for conventional and LBC smears, respectively; <I>P</I> &lt; 0.001 for difference. In women with significant endometrial pathology, the presence of NECs in followed-up women was associated with abnormal uterine bleeding in 79% (95% CI 68&ndash;87%) of cases.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Compared with conventional cytology, LBC may be associated with a higher prevalence of NECs but these are less likely to be associated with endometrial pathology. This finding might be explained by more consistent use of sampling instruments for LBC with better access to the endocervical canal or alternatively by changes over time, broadly coincident with the introduction of LBC, in the population in which NECs are reported. In followed-up women with NECs, most endometrial pathology is accompanied by symptoms, implying that a relatively smaller number of additional cases are identified through follow-up of asymptomatic women.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Canfell, K., Kang, Y. J., Clements, M., Moa, A. M., Beral, V.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:15:26 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2008.008069</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Normal endometrial cells in cervical cytology: systematic review of prevalence and relation to significant endometrial pathology]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>198</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>188</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/199?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Automated imaging of circulating fluorocytes for the diagnosis of erythropoietic protoporphyria: a pilot study for population screening]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/199?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objectives</st>
<p>To improve the traditional fresh blood film method to a high-throughput analysis of the presence of circulating fluorescent red cells (fluorocytes) in erythropoietic protoporphyria (EPP) using an automated imaging system.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>Based on the autofluorescence of protoporphyrin, we used an automatic image acquisition platform for examining fluorocytes in peripheral blood with minimal sample preparation. The image acquisition is easy-to-use under automated operations of excitation, focusing, detection and data analysis. Quality image and semi-quantitative fluorescence measurement of fluorocytes can be generated in a single step. For high-throughput analysis, the platform can image more than 200 96-well micro-plates, i.e. 19200 samples, in approximately 10 hours. Importantly, the reagent cost of analysis is negligible.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>In this pilot study, three EPP patients were diagnosed and 4000 normal individuals were screened for EPP by this method. Our results showed that the method can distinguish the overt case and asymptomatic carriers. It gives reliable evidence for rapid EPP screening.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>This automated imaging system provides multiple advantages that improve the traditional fresh blood film method as a more effective diagnostic tool and facilitates population screening for EPP. As fluorocytes are present in the umbilical cord blood of EPP patients, this high-throughput method can be potentially used for newborn screening of EPP.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lau, K.-C., Lam, C.-W.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:15:26 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2008.008038</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Automated imaging of circulating fluorocytes for the diagnosis of erythropoietic protoporphyria: a pilot study for population screening]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>203</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>199</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/204?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[First trimester Down's syndrome screening marker values and cigarette smoking: new data and a meta-analysis on free {beta} human chorionic gonadotophin, pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A and nuchal translucency]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/204?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Objectives</st>
<p>To examine the effect of smoking on three first trimester screening markers for Down's syndrome that constitute the Combined test, namely nuchal translucency (NT), pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A) and free &beta; human chorionic gonadotophin (free &beta;-hCG) and to use the results to determine which of these markers need to be adjusted for smoking and by how much.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>The difference in the median multiple of the median (MoM) values in smokers compared to non-smokers was determined for NT, PAPP-A and free &beta;-hCG in 12,517 unaffected pregnancies that had routine first trimester Combined test screening. These results were then included in a meta-analysis of published studies and the effect of adjusting for smoking on screening performance of the Combined test was estimated.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>The results using the routine screening data were similar to the summary estimates from the meta-analysis of all studies. The results from the meta-analysis were; median MoM in smokers compared to non-smokers: 1.06 NT (95% confidence interval 1.03 to 1.10), 0.81 PAPP-A (0.80 to 0.83) and 0.94 free &beta;-hCG (0.89 to 0.99). The effect of adjusting for smoking on the Combined test is small, with an estimated less than half percentage point increase in the detection rate (the proportion of affected pregnancies with a positive result) for a 3% false-positive rate (the proportion of unaffected pregnancies with a positive result) and less than 0.2 percentage point decrease in the false-positive rate for an 85% detection rate.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Adjusting first trimester screening markers for smoking has a minimal favourable effect on screening performance, but it is simple to implement and this paper provides the adjustment factors needed if a decision is made to make such an adjustment.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bestwick, J. P, Huttly, W. J, Wald, N. J]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:15:26 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2008.008049</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[First trimester Down's syndrome screening marker values and cigarette smoking: new data and a meta-analysis on free {beta} human chorionic gonadotophin, pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A and nuchal translucency]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>206</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>204</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Short Communications</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/207?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Consensus recommendations for cervical cancer prevention in the Czech Republic: a report of the International Conference on Human Papillomavirus in Human Pathology (Prague, 1-3 May 2008)]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/207?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>A comparison of cervical cancer incidence and mortality in the Czech Republic with that from other countries shows that the burden of cervical cancer here is considerably higher than in Western Europe, where screening is widespread. In May 2008, the International Conference on Human Papillomavirus in Human Pathology was convened to review the latest evidence and to formulate consensus recommendations for the reduction of cervical cancer rates. The Czech Republic is spending considerable resources on cervical cancer prevention, but these resources are being used inefficiently. The current system is characterized by a lack of coordination and monitoring that leads to the over-screening of a minority of women while the majority of the target population are under-screened or not screened at all. It was recommended that a comprehensive, organized programme be implemented, coordinated by an independent administrative body with legal and budgetary responsibility. As the laboratory infrastructure and professional technical skills required for a quality-assured organized screening programme are already in place, implementation of this programme would not require much in the way of additional resources to produce substantial cost-effective reductions in cervical cancer rates.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tachezy, R., Davies, P., Arbyn, M., Rob, L., Lazdane, G., Petrenko, J., Hamsikova, E., Bekova, A., Klozar, J., Duskova, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:15:26 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2008.008057</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Consensus recommendations for cervical cancer prevention in the Czech Republic: a report of the International Conference on Human Papillomavirus in Human Pathology (Prague, 1-3 May 2008)]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>210</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>207</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Short Communications</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/211?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Audit of subjects with family history of colorectal cancer attending a familial cancer service]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/211?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ledlie, N., Chorley, W., Hurst, N.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:15:26 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2008.008082</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Audit of subjects with family history of colorectal cancer attending a familial cancer service]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>212</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>211</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Research Letter</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/213?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The cost of screening for gestational diabetes mellitus]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/213?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Wilson, N., Ashawesh, K., Smith, S., Anwar, A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:15:26 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2008.008089</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The cost of screening for gestational diabetes mellitus]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>213</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>213</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Letter to the Editor</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/214?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Erratum]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/214?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Goulard, H., Boussac-Zarebska, M., Ancelle-Park, R., Bloch, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:15:26 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2008.061108</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Erratum]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>214</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>214</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Miscellaneous</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/215?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme]]></title>
<link>http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/short/15/4/215?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:15:26 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1258/jms.2008.154hta</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Royal Society of Medicine</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>216</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>215</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Miscellaneous</prism:section>
</item>

</rdf:RDF>