Read on Twitter
@CMO_England @FPH @uksciencechief @SMC_London @muirgray @PHE_Screening @AllysonPollock @IndependentSage -whole thread-
The UK has 20+ years’ experience delivering evidence-based, systematic, high quality screening programmes, delivering more good than harm at affordable cost..
The UK has 20+ years’ experience delivering evidence-based, systematic, high quality screening programmes, delivering more good than harm at affordable cost..
This experience tells us that if you embark on a screening programme without having carefully evaluated it first, without proper quality assured pathway, without certainty of test performance in field settings, without full information for participants, and without the means to..
ensure intervention needed for those with positive results does indeed take place, then you will end up with an expensive mess causing more harm than good.
From what I can tell current proposals for screening City of Liverpool with SARS-CoV-2 rapid tests are not fit for purpose
From what I can tell current proposals for screening City of Liverpool with SARS-CoV-2 rapid tests are not fit for purpose
1) It is called a ‘pilot’ yet there appears to be no research design.
2) There is no concrete evidence that screening of this nature is helpful in outbreak control.
3) It appears to have no system design for who is eligible, how they will be invited, how they get results, ....
2) There is no concrete evidence that screening of this nature is helpful in outbreak control.
3) It appears to have no system design for who is eligible, how they will be invited, how they get results, ....
..what advice they will be given, how this will be followed up and how this will be integrated with test and trace and with local health and social care services
4) The tests being proposed are new, there is little data about their performance in field settings, and therefore ..
4) The tests being proposed are new, there is little data about their performance in field settings, and therefore ..
...many people will be given false results.
5) Harm from false results includes unnecessary isolation (for false positives), and false reassurance with potentially riskier behavior (for false negatives).
Based on my experience https://oxfordmedicine.com/view/10.1093/med/9780198805984.001.0001/med-9780198805984 I conclude ...
5) Harm from false results includes unnecessary isolation (for false positives), and false reassurance with potentially riskier behavior (for false negatives).
Based on my experience https://oxfordmedicine.com/view/10.1093/med/9780198805984.001.0001/med-9780198805984 I conclude ...
that the proposed Liverpool screening will fail to realise any benefit, and will cause harm through diversion of resources. It will distract from solving the problems with the test and trace programme.
