Less obvious is the potential
harm of false positive results and subsequent costly or invasive procedures.
In addition to the huge hit to your wallet, there's also the potential
harm of false positives, and just because a test has traditionally been done for a condition doesn't mean it's the best way to treat it.
Not exact matches
Specifically, the task force says the «
harms and costs
of false -
positive results, over diagnosis and overtreatment» outweigh any «significant reductions in the relative risk
of death from breast cancer.»
They suggest most women in their 40s should not have routine mammograms because the tests may cause more
harm than good because
of false positive results (follow - up testing proves negative for cancer).
Dr. Catalona, who was the first physician in the U.S. to run the phi test, added, «However, the problem is that higher levels
of PSA can also be caused by a benign enlargement or inflammation
of the prostate, leading to many
false ‐
positives for cancer and ultimately unnecessarily invasive biopsies and an increased potential for patient
harm.»
Given the lack
of mortality benefit
of screening, and the moderate to substantial
harms that could result from
false -
positive screeningtest results and subsequent surgery, the USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the
harms of screening for ovarian cancer outweigh the benefit, and the net balance
of the benefit and
harms of screening is negative.
In an editorial also published in the July 1 issue
of Annals
of Internal Medicine, Dr. George Sawaya and Dr. Vanessa Jacoby
of the Department
of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences at the University
of California, San Francisco write, «The pelvic examination has held a prominent place in women's health for many decades and has come to be more
of a ritual than an evidence - based practice... With the current state
of evidence, clinicians who continue to offer the examination should at least be cognizant about the uncertainty
of its benefits and its potential to cause
harm through
false -
positive testing and the cascade
of events it prompts.»
«Our finding
of time - limited
harm after
false -
positive screening mammograms is relevant for clinicians who counsel women on mammographic screening and for screening guideline development groups,» the researchers note.
Discussion: «Our finding
of time - limited
harm after
false -
positive screening mammograms is relevant for clinicians who counsel women on mammographic screening and for screening guideline development groups.»
But further studies are needed to determine whether
false -
positives harm quality
of life or increase anxiety about cancer.
I know that sounds bonkers crazy like a double negative... It's called avoiding the
false positive of making an untrue claim, or avoidance
of being the boy who called wolf when there really wasn't one... which could
harm scientists» reputations & science in general.