Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2016 Apr 21:3:361-6.
doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.04.006. eCollection 2016 Jun.

From 'D' to 'I': A critique of the current United States preventive services task force recommendation for testicular cancer screening

Affiliations
Review

From 'D' to 'I': A critique of the current United States preventive services task force recommendation for testicular cancer screening

Michael J Rovito et al. Prev Med Rep. .

Abstract

In 2004, the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) gave testicular cancer (TCa) screening a 'D' recommendation, discouraging the use of this preventive service. The USPSTF suggested that screening, inclusive of testicular self-examination (TSE) and clinician examination, does not reduce TCa mortality rates and that the high risk of false positives could serve as a detriment to patient quality of life. Others suggests that TCa screening is ineffective at detecting early-stage cases of TCa and readily highlights a lack of empirical evidence demonstrating said efficacy. These assertions, however, stand in stark contrast to the widely held support of TCa screening among practicing public health professionals, advocacy groups, and clinicians. In this present study, a review was conducted of the methods and processes used by the USPSTF in their 2011 reaffirmation of the 'D' grade recommendation. The evidence base and commentary offered as to why TSE, as part of the overall recommendation for TCa screening, was given a 'D' grade were analyzed for logical reasoning and methodological rigor. Considering the methodological flaws and the veritable lack of evidence needed to grant a conclusive recommendation, the question is raised if the current 'D' grade for TCa screening (i.e. discourage the use of said service) should be changed to an 'I' statement (i.e. the balance of benefits and harms is indeterminate). Therefore the purpose of this paper is to present the evidence of TCa screening in the context of efficacy and prevention in order for the field to reassess its relative value.

Keywords: Early detection of cancer; Practice guidelines as topic; Self-examination; Testicular neoplasms.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Aberger M., Wilson B., Holzbeierlein J.M., Griebling T.L., Nangia A.K. Testicular self-examination and testicular cancer: a cost-utility analysis. Cancer Med. 2014;3(6):1629–1634. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Addis M.E., Mahalik J.R. Men, masculinity, and the contexts of help seeking. Am. Psychol. 2003;58(1):5. - PubMed
    1. AHRQ U.S Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF): An introduction. 2012. http://www.ahrq.gov/professionals/clinicians-providers/guidelines-recomm...
    1. American Cancer Society Testicular Self-Exam. 2015. http://www.cancer.org/cancer/testicularcancer/moreinformation/doihavetes... (Retrieved from)
    1. American Urological Association AUA Men's Health Check-List. 2014. https://www.auanet.org/common/pdf/education/clinical-guidance/Mens-Healt... Retrieved from.

LinkOut - more resources