(...) proponents [of mammography screenings] have used the most misleading screening statistic there is: survival rates. A recent Komen foundation campaign typifies the approach: “Early detection saves lives. The five-year survival rate for breast cancer when caught early is 98 percent. When it’s not? It decreases to 23 percent.”
Survival rates always go up with early diagnosis: people who get a diagnosis earlier in life will live longer with their diagnosis, even if it doesn’t change their time of death by one iota. And diagnosing cancer in people whose “cancer” was never destined to kill them will inflate survival rates — even if the number of deaths stays exactly the same. In short, tell everyone they have cancer, and survival will skyrocket.
The article (by a co-author of the paper also referenced in the OP’s link) also does a better job pointing out various pitfalls in interpreting different metrics.
I am still sitting on my medical test that can diagnose every conceivable condition with a sensitivity of—behold − 100%.
I liked this snippet from the respective article of the NYTimes:
The article (by a co-author of the paper also referenced in the OP’s link) also does a better job pointing out various pitfalls in interpreting different metrics.
I am still sitting on my medical test that can diagnose every conceivable condition with a sensitivity of—behold − 100%.