Cleveland Clinic is willing to share their summary reports and to encourage others to do the same. They include suggestions as well...
The data from breast cancer screening demonstrates performance above the national benchmark. I would like to argue that screening isn't without harms (false positives, over-treatment of indolent cancers) and perhaps screening guidelines that discuss harms along with benefits would be helpful in directing care and resources to those likely to benefit from care. What types of cancers were detected? How many false positives? Indolent cancer types? Aggressive cancers? Is the goal detection or improving outcomes for phenotypes responsive to treatment?
Improving population health and reducing the cost of care are important metrics to include. A deeper dive into the data reveals the pain points and successes of one of the most influential care centers in the nation. I encourage you to access the reports and integrate the findings into discussions of screening appropriateness, drug targets, and emerging algorithms. Health care will not improve without meaningful metrics, robust debate, and most of all--transparency.
Thoughtful discussions about content development and outcomes analytics that apply the principles and frameworks of health policy and economics to persistent and perplexing health and health care problems.
Browse the archive...
Thank you for making a donution!
In a world of "evidence-based" medicine I am a bigger fan of practice-based evidence.
Remember the quote by Upton Sinclair...
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!”