Category: Screening

1 1/29/2018

In the real world, harms of lung cancer screening prove greater than expected

1 1/25/2018

Patients, doctors, journalists criticize “Free Preventive Mammograms” campaign

1/8/2018

Could finding more cancer lead us to understand risk factors less?

1 11/15/2017

Journalists shouldn’t take their audiences down the path of unnecessary medical tests

3 9/26/2017

A prostate ‘Pep Talk’ is the wrong way to get men thinking about cancer screening

8/21/2017

Imbalanced ‘Saved by the Scan’ campaign neglects big concerns over lung cancer screening

3 6/27/2017

3-D mammograms for all: political gimmickry that may harm more women than it helps

7 5/9/2017

Radiology society’s PR message about untreated breast cancer: Sound evidence or scare-mongering?

4/26/2017

‘OK to wait’ or ‘Delay at your own risk?’ Headspinning headlines on same colonoscopy study

2 4/20/2017

Podcast: Wellness programs – do they work?

Blog

Opinions on other issues in news, journals, PR, advertising, marketing

@HealthNewsRevu

Retweet on Twitter HealthNewsReview.org Retweeted

ScienceWriters @ScienceWriters·

A guide to specificity, sensitivity, positive predictive value, and other medical testing concepts. https://t.co/wDwTktPiWg @HealthNewsRevu

Reply on Twitter Retweet on Twitter7 Like on Twitter6 Twitter

Retweet on Twitter HealthNewsReview.org Retweeted

Marc Gozlan @MarcGozlan·

.@HealthNewsRevu, qui annonce son arrêt en décembre prochain après 12 ans d'activité. Ce site, véritable chien de garde de l'info santé, n'a eu de cesse de lutter contre la mésinformation, la désinformation et les conflits d'intérêt dans le journalisme médico-scientifique.

Reply on Twitter Retweet on Twitter3 Like on Twitter5 Twitter

Retweet on Twitter HealthNewsReview.org Retweeted

David Grenache, PhD @ClinChemDoc·

Thank you, thank you, thank you, @HealthNewsRevu for this piece! Required reading for anyone who has ever had or ordered a lab test. So, basically, everyone. Understanding medical tests: sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value https://t.co/BRt3qJLKgo

Reply on Twitter Retweet on Twitter13 Like on Twitter17 Twitter

Category: Screening

In the real world, harms of lung cancer screening prove greater than expected

Patients, doctors, journalists criticize “Free Preventive Mammograms” campaign

Could finding more cancer lead us to understand risk factors less?

Journalists shouldn’t take their audiences down the path of unnecessary medical tests

A prostate ‘Pep Talk’ is the wrong way to get men thinking about cancer screening

Imbalanced ‘Saved by the Scan’ campaign neglects big concerns over lung cancer screening

3-D mammograms for all: political gimmickry that may harm more women than it helps

Radiology society’s PR message about untreated breast cancer: Sound evidence or scare-mongering?

‘OK to wait’ or ‘Delay at your own risk?’ Headspinning headlines on same colonoscopy study

Podcast: Wellness programs – do they work?

Blog

Categories

Tags

@HealthNewsRevu