The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer screening
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
To the Editor, We read with interest the Letter to the Editor by Mungmunpuntipamtip and Wiwanitkit concerning our paper, where they report high cervical cancer screening and cancer detection rates in their settings during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is in contrast with previous studies from the USA (Miller et al., 2021), Canada (Walker et al., 2021), Zimbabwe (Murewanhema, 2021) and West Cameroon (Sormani et al., 2021) that found substantial decreases in cervical cancer screening rates. More recently, an online survey by the International Cancer Screening Network concluded that the first wave of the pandemic had a substantial impact on cancer screening worldwide, with the suspension of services in over 90% of the settings analyzed (Puricelli Perin et al., 2021). The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic led to service delays, health and broader infrastructure constraints, even in settings where services continued. In particular, there was a shift in public health priorities to respond to the pandemic, and health system restrictions occurred with shortages in materials for screening as supply chains were impacted. Furthermore, patients may have experienced barriers to access, as well as an unwillingness to attend screening due to fear of contracting COVID-19. Nevertheless, the magnitude of the effect of the pandemic is expectedly heterogeneous across settings, and ongoing monitoring of the impact of the pandemic on cancer screening and the management of backlogs must continue, as well as determining how service disruptions will translate to clinically meaningful changes in incidence, stage at diagnosis and poorer outcomes. Acknowledgements This study was funded by the Foundation for Science and Technology – FCT (Portuguese Ministry of Science, Technology and Higher Education) in collaboration with the Agency for Clinical Research and Biomedical Innovation (AICIB), under the scope of the project 'Impacto da pandemia COVID-19 nos cuidados prestados a doentes oncológicos' (Research 4 COVID 174_596850546), and national funding from FCT, under the Unidade de Investigação em Epidemiologia – Instituto de Saúde Pública da Universidade do Porto (EPIUnit; UIDB/04750/2020). SM was also funded under the scope of the project 'NEON-PC - Neuro-oncological complications of prostate cancer: longitudinal study of cognitive decline' (POCI-01-0145-FEDER-032358; ref. PTDC/SAU-EPI/32358/2017), which is funded by FEDER through the Operational Programme Competitiveness and Internationalization, and national funding from FCT. The funding sources had no involvement in the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article. Conflicts of interest There are no conflicts of interest.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».