Cargando…

Half a Century of Wilson & Jungner: Reflections on the Governance of Population Screening

Background: In their landmark report on the “Principles and Practice of Screening for Disease” (1968), Wilson and Jungner noted that the practice of screening is just as important for securing beneficial outcomes and avoiding harms as the formulation of principles. Many jurisdictions have since esta...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sturdy, Steve, Miller, Fiona, Hogarth, Stuart, Armstrong, Natalie, Chakraborty, Pranesh, Cressman, Celine, Dobrow, Mark, Flitcroft, Kathy, Grossman, David, Harris, Russell, Hoebee, Barbara, Holloway, Kelly, Kinsinger, Linda, Krag, Marlene, Löblová, Olga, Löwy, Ilana, Mackie, Anne, Marshall, John, O'Hallahan, Jane, Rabeneck, Linda, Raffle, Angela, Reid, Lynette, Shortland, Graham, Steele, Robert, Tarini, Beth, Taylor-Phillips, Sian, Towler, Bernie, van der Veen, Nynke, Zappa, Marco
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: F1000 Research Limited 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7468564/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32923689
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.16057.2
_version_ 1783578245513347072
author Sturdy, Steve
Miller, Fiona
Hogarth, Stuart
Armstrong, Natalie
Chakraborty, Pranesh
Cressman, Celine
Dobrow, Mark
Flitcroft, Kathy
Grossman, David
Harris, Russell
Hoebee, Barbara
Holloway, Kelly
Kinsinger, Linda
Krag, Marlene
Löblová, Olga
Löwy, Ilana
Mackie, Anne
Marshall, John
O'Hallahan, Jane
Rabeneck, Linda
Raffle, Angela
Reid, Lynette
Shortland, Graham
Steele, Robert
Tarini, Beth
Taylor-Phillips, Sian
Towler, Bernie
van der Veen, Nynke
Zappa, Marco
author_facet Sturdy, Steve
Miller, Fiona
Hogarth, Stuart
Armstrong, Natalie
Chakraborty, Pranesh
Cressman, Celine
Dobrow, Mark
Flitcroft, Kathy
Grossman, David
Harris, Russell
Hoebee, Barbara
Holloway, Kelly
Kinsinger, Linda
Krag, Marlene
Löblová, Olga
Löwy, Ilana
Mackie, Anne
Marshall, John
O'Hallahan, Jane
Rabeneck, Linda
Raffle, Angela
Reid, Lynette
Shortland, Graham
Steele, Robert
Tarini, Beth
Taylor-Phillips, Sian
Towler, Bernie
van der Veen, Nynke
Zappa, Marco
author_sort Sturdy, Steve
collection PubMed
description Background: In their landmark report on the “Principles and Practice of Screening for Disease” (1968), Wilson and Jungner noted that the practice of screening is just as important for securing beneficial outcomes and avoiding harms as the formulation of principles. Many jurisdictions have since established various kinds of “screening governance organizations” to provide oversight of screening practice. Yet to date there has been relatively little reflection on the nature and organization of screening governance itself, or on how different governance arrangements affect the way screening is implemented and perceived and the balance of benefits and harms it delivers. Methods: An international expert policy workshop convened by Sturdy, Miller and Hogarth. Results: While effective governance is essential to promote beneficial screening practices and avoid attendant harms, screening governance organizations face enduring challenges. These challenges are social and ethical as much as technical. Evidence-based adjudication of the benefits and harms of population screening must take account of factors that inform the production and interpretation of evidence, including the divergent professional, financial and personal commitments of stakeholders. Similarly, when planning and overseeing organized screening programs, screening governance organizations must persuade or compel multiple stakeholders to work together to a common end. Screening governance organizations in different jurisdictions vary widely in how they are constituted, how they relate to other interested organizations and actors, and what powers and authority they wield. Yet we know little about how these differences affect the way screening is implemented, and with what consequences. Conclusions: Systematic research into how screening governance is organized in different jurisdictions would facilitate policy learning to address enduring challenges. Even without such research, informal exchange and sharing of experiences between screening governance organizations can deliver invaluable insights into the social as well as the technical aspects of governance.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7468564
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher F1000 Research Limited
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74685642020-09-11 Half a Century of Wilson & Jungner: Reflections on the Governance of Population Screening Sturdy, Steve Miller, Fiona Hogarth, Stuart Armstrong, Natalie Chakraborty, Pranesh Cressman, Celine Dobrow, Mark Flitcroft, Kathy Grossman, David Harris, Russell Hoebee, Barbara Holloway, Kelly Kinsinger, Linda Krag, Marlene Löblová, Olga Löwy, Ilana Mackie, Anne Marshall, John O'Hallahan, Jane Rabeneck, Linda Raffle, Angela Reid, Lynette Shortland, Graham Steele, Robert Tarini, Beth Taylor-Phillips, Sian Towler, Bernie van der Veen, Nynke Zappa, Marco Wellcome Open Res Open Letter Background: In their landmark report on the “Principles and Practice of Screening for Disease” (1968), Wilson and Jungner noted that the practice of screening is just as important for securing beneficial outcomes and avoiding harms as the formulation of principles. Many jurisdictions have since established various kinds of “screening governance organizations” to provide oversight of screening practice. Yet to date there has been relatively little reflection on the nature and organization of screening governance itself, or on how different governance arrangements affect the way screening is implemented and perceived and the balance of benefits and harms it delivers. Methods: An international expert policy workshop convened by Sturdy, Miller and Hogarth. Results: While effective governance is essential to promote beneficial screening practices and avoid attendant harms, screening governance organizations face enduring challenges. These challenges are social and ethical as much as technical. Evidence-based adjudication of the benefits and harms of population screening must take account of factors that inform the production and interpretation of evidence, including the divergent professional, financial and personal commitments of stakeholders. Similarly, when planning and overseeing organized screening programs, screening governance organizations must persuade or compel multiple stakeholders to work together to a common end. Screening governance organizations in different jurisdictions vary widely in how they are constituted, how they relate to other interested organizations and actors, and what powers and authority they wield. Yet we know little about how these differences affect the way screening is implemented, and with what consequences. Conclusions: Systematic research into how screening governance is organized in different jurisdictions would facilitate policy learning to address enduring challenges. Even without such research, informal exchange and sharing of experiences between screening governance organizations can deliver invaluable insights into the social as well as the technical aspects of governance. F1000 Research Limited 2020-08-17 /pmc/articles/PMC7468564/ /pubmed/32923689 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.16057.2 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Sturdy S et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Open Letter
Sturdy, Steve
Miller, Fiona
Hogarth, Stuart
Armstrong, Natalie
Chakraborty, Pranesh
Cressman, Celine
Dobrow, Mark
Flitcroft, Kathy
Grossman, David
Harris, Russell
Hoebee, Barbara
Holloway, Kelly
Kinsinger, Linda
Krag, Marlene
Löblová, Olga
Löwy, Ilana
Mackie, Anne
Marshall, John
O'Hallahan, Jane
Rabeneck, Linda
Raffle, Angela
Reid, Lynette
Shortland, Graham
Steele, Robert
Tarini, Beth
Taylor-Phillips, Sian
Towler, Bernie
van der Veen, Nynke
Zappa, Marco
Half a Century of Wilson & Jungner: Reflections on the Governance of Population Screening
title Half a Century of Wilson & Jungner: Reflections on the Governance of Population Screening
title_full Half a Century of Wilson & Jungner: Reflections on the Governance of Population Screening
title_fullStr Half a Century of Wilson & Jungner: Reflections on the Governance of Population Screening
title_full_unstemmed Half a Century of Wilson & Jungner: Reflections on the Governance of Population Screening
title_short Half a Century of Wilson & Jungner: Reflections on the Governance of Population Screening
title_sort half a century of wilson & jungner: reflections on the governance of population screening
topic Open Letter
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7468564/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32923689
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.16057.2
work_keys_str_mv AT sturdysteve halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT millerfiona halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT hogarthstuart halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT armstrongnatalie halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT chakrabortypranesh halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT cressmanceline halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT dobrowmark halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT flitcroftkathy halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT grossmandavid halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT harrisrussell halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT hoebeebarbara halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT hollowaykelly halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT kinsingerlinda halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT kragmarlene halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT loblovaolga halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT lowyilana halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT mackieanne halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT marshalljohn halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT ohallahanjane halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT rabenecklinda halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT raffleangela halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT reidlynette halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT shortlandgraham halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT steelerobert halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT tarinibeth halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT taylorphillipssian halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT towlerbernie halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT vanderveennynke halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening
AT zappamarco halfacenturyofwilsonjungnerreflectionsonthegovernanceofpopulationscreening