NOTE TO READERS: When this project lost substantial funding at the end of 2018, I lost the ability to continue publishing criteria-driven news story reviews and PR news release reviews - once the bread-and-butter of the site going back to 2006. The 3,200 archived reviews, while still educational, are getting old and difficult for me to technically maintain on the back end of the website. So I am announcing that I plan to remove these reviews from the site by April 1, 2021. The blog and the toolkit - two of the most popular features on the site - will remain. If you wish to peruse the reviews before they disappear, please do so by the end of March 2021. After that date you may still be able to access them via the Internet Archive Wayback Machine -

Categories: Screening tests


Kudos for university’s restraint in promoting at-home HPV tests for women


Recap of hip fracture screening study takes balanced approach on a serious health issue


Time to retire the Pap test? Strong study recap explores the trade-offs


Balanced summary of iron deficiency research marred by inaccurate headline


Confusing screening and diagnosis, and over-stating the potential impact of a high-tech device for finding cervical cancer


Even casual readers expect more than broad claims about screening tests. Where’s the data?


Test for opioid abuse risk based on problematic evidence


Medical center needed more balance in messages about lung cancer screening initiative


Mayo touts new blood test to improve cardiovascular risk prediction; doesn’t acknowledge that we’ve been down this road before


Lung cancer test based on “a simple blood draw”? There’s no such thing