OnCo
ideasIdea

Every screening programme must publish its overdiagnosis rate each year

Screening finds cancers that would never have caused harm, but programmes only report cancers found. Publishing the estimated overdiagnosis rate alongside would make the trade-off visible.

Overdiagnosis is estimable from excess cumulative incidence versus unscreened comparators and from modelling. Propose a regulatory requirement for annual reporting of estimated overdiagnosis, false positives, and procedures per cancer, in standard formats, for every publicly funded screening programme and any reimbursed MCED.

Hypothesis
Mandatory reporting drives programme changes (thresholds, intervals) that reduce overdiagnosis by at least 20% within five years without reducing advanced-cancer detection.
Rationale
Current metrics reward detection volume; what is measured is managed.
What would test it
Adopt in one country; compare programme changes with non-adopters.
Maturity
speculative
Who has to act
regulator
Cost to try
Small (under $1M)
Years to first evidence
3
Bottlenecks it attacks

Connected

4top

Pages like this

not linked directly; found by shared links