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
. 2025 Feb 3;20(2):e0315247.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0315247. eCollection 2025.

Do health professionals know about overdiagnosis in screening, and how are they dealing with it? A mixed-methods systematic scoping review

Affiliations

Do health professionals know about overdiagnosis in screening, and how are they dealing with it? A mixed-methods systematic scoping review

Veerle Piessens et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Introduction: Medical screening is a major driver of overdiagnosis, which should be considered when making an informed screening decision. Health professionals (HPs) often initiate screening and are therefore responsible for informing eligible screening participants about the benefits and harms of screening. However, little is known about HPs' knowledge of overdiagnosis and whether they are prepared to inform screening candidates about this risk and enable people to make an informed screening decision.

Methods: This is a systematic review of studies examining HPs' knowledge and perception of overdiagnosis, whether it affects their position on offering screening, and their willingness to inform screening candidates about overdiagnosis. We conducted systematic searches in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, and PsycArticles without language restrictions. Two authors analysed the qualitative and quantitative data separately. Confidence in the findings of the qualitative data was assessed using the GRADE-CERQual approach.

Results: We included 23 publications after screening 9786 records. No studies directly examined HPs' knowledge of overdiagnosis. HPs' perceptions of overdiagnosis varied widely, from considering it a significant harm to seeing it as negligible. This seems linked to their overall beliefs about the benefits and harms of screening and to their position on offering screening, which varies from discouraging to actively promoting it. HPs also hold diverging approaches to informing screening candidates about overdiagnosis, from providing detailed explanations to limited or no information.

Conclusion: There is a lack of research on HPs' knowledge of overdiagnosis, however, HPs who do know about overdiagnosis attribute substantially different levels of harm to it. This seems intertwined with their overall beliefs about the benefits of screening, their position towards offering screening, and their willingness to inform screening candidates about overdiagnosis. This has important implications for the public's right to evidence-based information and compromises an individual's right to make an informed screening decision.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. PRISMA flow chart.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Different perceptions of overdiagnosis and related ideas about the benefits and harms of screening, preferred screening policies, and communication strategies.

Similar articles

References

    1. Brodersen J, Schwartz LM, Heneghan C, O’Sullivan JW, Aronson JK, Woloshin S. Overdiagnosis: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ Evid Based Med. 2018;23(1):1–3. doi: 10.1136/ebmed-2017-110886 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Woloshin S, Kramer B. Overdiagnosis: it’s official. BMJ. 2021;375:n2854. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n2854 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Akin-Odanye EO, Husman AJ. Impact of stigma and stigma-focused interventions on screening and treatment outcomes in cancer patients. Ecancermedicalscience. 2021;151308. doi: 10.3332/ecancer.2021.1308 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brownlee Z, Garg R, Listo M, Zavitsanos P, Wazer DE, Huber KE. Late complications of radiation therapy for breast cancer: evolution in techniques and risk over time. Gland Surg. 2018;7(4):371–8. doi: 10.21037/gs.2018.01.05 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Johansson E, Steineck G, Holmberg L, Johansson J-E, Nyberg T, Ruutu M, et al.. Long-term quality-of-life outcomes after radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting: the Scandinavian prostate cancer Group-4 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(9):891–9. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70162-0 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources