Question · asked by 1 review

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening: Harms of screening (false-positive/false-negative outcomes)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

What each review found

Current versions only
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening
Harms of screening (false-positive/false-negative outcomes) · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of… · 15-year follow-up
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer (2013) · Cochrane All outcomes
No harms were reported.0 studiesNo studies found
Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening
Harms of screening (false-positive/false-negative outcomes) · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of… · 9-year follow-up
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer (2010) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD004150.PUB3, superseded
Harms of screening from false positive or false negative results (a planned outcome) were not reported.0 studiesNo studies found
Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening
Harms of screening (false-positive/false-negative outcomes) · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of… · 9-year follow-up
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer (2006) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD004150.PUB2, superseded
The study did not provide any information related to harms of screening from false-positive or false-negative findings.0 studiesNo studies found
Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening
Harms of screening (false-positive/false-negative outcomes) · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of… · 6-year follow-up
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer (2003) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD004150, superseded
This study did not raise any issues with regard to the harms of screening from false positive or false negative findings.0 studiesNo studies found

Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer
2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
22 July 2013list not extracted yetNot assessed

Studies behind the findings

None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.

How reviews are matched to this question

Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.