Mathematical modelling to guide colorectal cancer screening and surveillance policies
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This thesis consists of three main parts, each addressing different topics regarding the evaluation and improvement of CRC screening and surveillance. In the first part of this thesis, we describe possibilities to improve the CRC screening programme. In Chapter 2, we study the benefit-harm balance of participating in CRC screening for many subgroups aiming to help individuals making an informed decision about screening participation. To do so, we combine risk estimates of the benefits and harms of CRC screening, derived with the ASCCA model, with the relative importance of CRC screening outcomes obtained with a preference eliciting survey in order to obtain the benefit-harm balance of screening. In Chapter 3, we evaluate the clinical utility of a new stool test in a large-scale paired-intervention study conducted in the Dutch CRC screening programme. In Chapter 4, we assess the accuracy of various summarising measures commonly used to report adherence over multiple rounds of stool-based CRC screening. In addition, we assess the impact of using these summarising measures, rather than using detailed longitudinal adherence data, on model-predicted CRC screening effectiveness using the ASCCA model. The second part of this thesis investigates surveillance in two populations who are at increased risk of CRC. In Chapter 5, we evaluate whether stool-based surveillance could serve as an alternative to colonoscopy surveillance in a post-polypectomy surveillance population. In Chapter 6, we study the optimal surveillance strategy for individuals with a family history of CRC, considering colonoscopy surveillance, FIT-based surveillance and surveillance including both colonoscopy and FIT. The third part of this thesis focuses on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on CRC screening programmes. For this purpose, multiple independent models are used to answer the same research question. In addition to the ASCCA model, the MISCAN-Colon model, the Policy1-Bowel model, and the OncoSim model are used, which are developed for the Netherlands, Australia, and Canada, respectively. We study the short-term and long-term impact of hypothetical disruptions to CRC screening programmes in three countries, e.g. the Netherlands, Australia and Canada, in Chapter 7. In Chapter 8, we investigate two approaches for managing the screening backlog that results from a three-month screening disruption in the same three countries. The objective is to provide guidance on how to manage catch-up screening within available colonoscopy capacity. In Chapter 9, we estimate the global impact on CRC burden due to COVID-19 related decreases to organised CRC screening based on real-world data. To do so, all four models are used to draw conclusions for countries other than those for which the model was originally developed. As this provides an additional level of uncertainty, the results are aggregated across the multiple models to take this uncertainty into account. Chapter 10 summarizes the main findings presented in this thesis. Moreover, we discuss methodological issues and provide recommendations for future research.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,018 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,015 | 0,002 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».