Patient Understanding of Benefits, Risks, and Alternatives to Screening Colonoscopy

, , , , &
Family Medicine 45 (2):83-89 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

While several tests and strategies are recommended for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, studies suggest that primary care providers often recommend colonoscopy without providing information about its risks or alternatives. These observations raise concerns about the quality of informed consent for screening colonoscopy.

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

How should we measure informed choice? The case of cancer screening.R. G. Jepson - 2005 - Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (4):192-196.
Uninformed consent: Mass screening for prostate cancer.Stewart Justman - 2010 - Bioethics 26 (3):143-148.
The Ethics of Information: Absolute Risk Reduction and Patient Understanding of Screening.Peter H. Schwartz & Eric M. Meslin - 2008 - Journal of General Internal Medicine 23 (6):867-870.
Parental consent for newborn screening in southern Taiwan.M.-C. Huang - 2005 - Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (11):621-624.
Under what conditions do patients want to be informed about their risk of a complication? A vignette study.N. B. A. T. Janssen, F. J. Oort, P. Fockens, D. L. Willems, H. C. J. M. de Haes & E. M. A. Smets - 2009 - Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (5):276-282.
Challenging the rhetoric of choice in prenatal screening.Victoria Seavilleklein - 2008 - Bioethics 23 (1):68-77.
Older Adults and Forgoing Cancer Screening.Alexia M. Torke, Peter H. Schwartz, Laura R. Holtz, Kianna Montz & Greg A. Sachs - 2013 - Journal of the American Medical Association Internal Medicine 173 (7):526-531.
Routine screening: Informed consent, stigma and the waning of HIV exceptionalism.Matthew K. Wynia - 2006 - American Journal of Bioethics 6 (4):5 – 8.
Screening: the information individuals need to support their decision: per protocol analysis is better than intention-to-treat analysis at quantifying potential benefits and harms of screening.Paolo Giorgi Rossi - 2014 - BMC Medical Ethics 15 (1):28.
Informed choice requires information about both benefits and harms.K. J. Jorgensen, J. Brodersen, O. J. Hartling, M. Nielsen & P. C. Gotzsche - 2009 - Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (4):268-269.
The Ethics of Krabbe Newborn Screening.R. H. Dees & J. M. Kwon - 2013 - Public Health Ethics 6 (1):114-128.
Reaching targets in the national cervical screening programme: are current practices unethical?P. Foster & C. M. Anderson - 1998 - Journal of Medical Ethics 24 (3):151-157.
Challenges of informed choice in organised screening.W. Østerlie, M. Solbjør, J. -A. Skolbekken, S. Hofvind & A. R. Sætnan - 2008 - Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (9):e5-e5.
Knowledge or Understanding? Informed Choice in the Context of Newborn Bloodspot Screening.Stuart G. Nicholls - 2010 - Public Health Ethics 3 (2):128-136.
Challenges of informed choice in organised screening.W. Osterlie, M. Solbjor, J.-A. Skolbekken, S. Hofvind, A. R. Saetnan & S. Forsmo - 2008 - Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (9):e5-e5.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-07-23

Downloads
432 (#43,475)

6 months
99 (#39,841)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Peter H. Schwartz
Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis
Elizabeth Edenberg
Baruch College (CUNY)

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references