AJPH
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 88, Issue 4 551-557, Copyright © 1998 by American Public Health Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Related articles in AJPH
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Serra-Prat, M
Right arrow Articles by Estrada, M D
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Serra-Prat, M
Right arrow Articles by Estrada, M D
Trade-offs in prenatal detection of Down syndrome.

M Serra-Prat, P Gallo, A J Jovell, M Aymerich and M D Estrada

Catalan Agency for Health Technology Assessment, Generalitat de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.

OBJECTIVES: This paper presents the results of different screening policies for prenatal detection of Down syndrome that would allow decision makers to make informed choices. METHODS: A decision analysis model was built to compare 8 screening policies with regard to a selected set of outcome measures. Probabilities used in the analysis were obtained from official administrative data reports in Spain and Catalonia and from data published in the medical literature. Sensitivity analyses were carried out to test the robustness of screening policies' results to changes in uptake rates, diagnostic accuracy, and resources consumed. RESULTS: Selected screening policies posed major trades-offs regarding detection rates, false-positive results, fetal loss, and costs of the programs. All outcome measures considered were found quite robust to changes in uptake rates. Sensitivity and specificity rates of screening tests were shown to be the most influential factors in the outcome measures considered. CONCLUSIONS: The disclosed trade-offs emphasize the need to comprehensively inform decision makers about both positive and negative consequences of adopting one screening policy or another.


Related articles in AJPH:

Rational Down syndrome screening policy.
H Cuckle
AJPH 1998 88: 558-559. [PDF]  

Cost-effectiveness and Down syndrome.
T G Ganiats and S B Cantor
AJPH 1999 89: 110-112. [PDF]  





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1998 by the American Public Health Association