Good health checks according to the general public; expectations and criteria: a focus group study
- PMID: 29929500
- PMCID: PMC6013874
- DOI: 10.1186/s12910-018-0301-6
Good health checks according to the general public; expectations and criteria: a focus group study
Abstract
Background: Health checks or health screenings identify (risk factors for) disease in people without a specific medical indication. So far, the perspective of (potential) health check users has remained underexposed in discussions about the ethics and regulation of health checks.
Methods: In 2017, we conducted a qualitative study with lay people from the Netherlands (four focus groups). We asked what participants consider characteristics of good and bad health checks, and whether they saw a role for the Dutch government.
Results: Participants consider a good predictive value the most important characteristic of a good health check. Information before, during and after the test, knowledgeable and reliable providers, tests for treatable (risk factors for) disease, respect for privacy, no unnecessary health risks and accessibility are also mentioned as criteria for good health checks. Participants make many assumptions about health check offers. They assume health checks provide certainty about the presence or absence of disease, that health checks offer opportunities for health benefits and that the privacy of health check data is guaranteed. In their choice for provider and test they tend to rely more on heuristics than information. Participants trust physicians to put the interest of potential health check users first and expect the Dutch government to intervene if providers other than physicians failed to do so by offering tests with a low predictive value, or tests that may harm people, or by infringing the privacy of users.
Conclusions: Assumptions of participants are not always justified, but they may influence the choice to participate. This is problematic because choices for checks with a low predictive value that do not provide health benefits may create uncertainty and may cause harm to health; an outcome diametrically opposite to the one intended. Also, this may impair the relationship of trust with physicians and the Dutch government. To further and protect autonomous choice and to maintain trust, we recommend the following measures to timely adjust false expectations: advertisements that give an accurate impression of health check offers, and the installation of a quality mark.
Keywords: Criteria; Ethics; Focus groups; Health check; Heuristics; Qualitative research; Screening; Trust.
Conflict of interest statement
Ethics approval and consent to participate
In the Netherlands, ethics approval or written informed consent for this type of research is not required according to the Medical Research (Human Subjects) Act (WMO) [43]. Participants were informed orally about the purposes of the study beforehand and enabled to ask questions. They gave their verbal consent to participate and to anonymized publication of findings, which was recorded on tape.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interest.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Similar articles
-
What is a good health check? An interview study of health check providers' views and practices.BMC Med Ethics. 2017 Oct 2;18(1):55. doi: 10.1186/s12910-017-0213-x. BMC Med Ethics. 2017. PMID: 28969671 Free PMC article.
-
To Check or Not to Check? A Qualitative Study on How the Public Decides on Health Checks for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention.PLoS One. 2016 Jul 14;11(7):e0159438. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159438. eCollection 2016. PLoS One. 2016. PMID: 27415432 Free PMC article.
-
[Health checks in the Netherlands difficult to control].Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2008 May 24;152(21):1195-6. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2008. PMID: 18578444 Dutch.
-
Routine health check-ups: A boon or a burden?Natl Med J India. 2016 Jan-Feb;29(1):18-21. doi: 10.4103/0970-258x.186908. Natl Med J India. 2016. PMID: 27492031 Review.
-
Delta Checks in the clinical laboratory.Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci. 2019 Mar;56(2):75-97. doi: 10.1080/10408363.2018.1540536. Epub 2019 Jan 11. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci. 2019. PMID: 30632840 Review.
Cited by
-
Stakeholders' perceptions and experiences of factors influencing the commissioning, delivery, and uptake of general health checks: a qualitative evidence synthesis.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025 Mar 20;3(3):CD014796. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014796.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025. PMID: 40110911
-
Influencing factors of participation in and satisfaction with elderly health checkups: a cross-sectional study.Front Public Health. 2023 Apr 27;11:1104438. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1104438. eCollection 2023. Front Public Health. 2023. PMID: 37188280 Free PMC article.
-
Presenting a Comprehensive Definition of Unnecessary Healthcare Services and Their Drivers: A Systematic Review and Meta-synthesis.Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2023 Oct 2;37:106. doi: 10.47176/mjiri.37.106. eCollection 2023. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2023. PMID: 38021385 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Exploring targeted preventive health check interventions - a realist synthesis.BMC Public Health. 2023 Oct 5;23(1):1928. doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-16861-8. BMC Public Health. 2023. PMID: 37798691 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Ethics of early detection of disease risk factors: A scoping review.BMC Med Ethics. 2024 Mar 5;25(1):25. doi: 10.1186/s12910-024-01012-4. BMC Med Ethics. 2024. PMID: 38443930 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Health council of the Netherlands (HCN) Checking checked: appropriate use of health checks. The Hague: Health Council of the Netherlands; 2015.
-
- Juth N, Munthe C. The ethics of screening in health care and medicine. Serving society or serving the patient? International library of ethics, law, and the new medicine. Dordrecht: Springer; 2012.
-
- The Nuffield Council on Bioethics . Medical profiling and online medicine: the ethics of ‘personalised healthcare’ in a consumer age. Oxfordshire: Nuffield Press; 2010.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Research Materials