Screening for Diseases as Caution Against Potential Infections Essay

Exclusively available on Available only on IvyPanda® Made by Human No AI

Introduction

Screening is one of the most important illness preventive procedures undertaken as caution against potential infections. It entails tests performed on persons without any clinical sign of disease, and although they do not diagnose illness, those who test positive are sent on further evaluation by a subsequent diagnostic test or procedure to determine whether they are infected with the disease. There are a variety of preventive measures used in curbing the onset and the overall spread of diseases. These include primary (actual prevention of disease before being able to occur), secondary (early detection of disease while its still curable, especially using the process of screening), and tertiary prevention, which limits disease spread (Hennekens, Buring, and Mayrent, 1987). The effectiveness of screening tests is defined in terms of sensitivity (the probability of possible positive result outcomes of any given test performed on a group of infected individuals), specificity (defines the probability of chances of the outcomes being negative obtained from a non-infected person) and predictive values (Anon, 2003).

Impact of cut-off points

Moving from point A to B, all those patients without HIV are correctly identified, resulting into perfect specificity of the test results. However, at point B, the proportion of infected patients with HIV is not correctly identified, that is, the proportion is missing, resulting into reduced sensitivity of the test. At point A, it is a compromise, while at point C, there is perfect sensitivity identifying all the infected patients with HIV; however, the specificity is poor because those healthy patients are incorrectly identified as part of the infected patients with HIV. Hence, moving the cut-off from A to C increases the sensitivity while reducing the specificity of the tests. For the test, the cut-off should possibly be put close to point A. This being a compromise point, it will label patients with HIV and mislabel other patients not infected with HIV, hence minimal error at this point.

Sensitivity and specificity are inversely related in any given test because the degree of accuracy of one value increases while the other value decreases, depending on the choice of the cot-off point of any given test. Both sensitivity and specificity are used for determination of accuracy of screening tests (Grimes, Schulz, 2002).

The Blood Bank Director has to put the cut-off point for screening at point B. This is because at this point, there will be perfect specificity in identification of healthy patients, that is, those whose blood does not have the HIV antibody. However, the potential problem here is that the proportion of infected patients with HIV will not be available, a ratio of true negative test (d) / all patients without disease (d + b), i.e. d / (d + b). An investigator enrolling high-risk patients will draw the cut-off at point C. This is because of the perfect sensitivity of the test results, which identifies the population of patients infected with HIV, using the ratio; true positive test results (a)/all patients with disease (a + c), i.e. (a)/ (a + c). However, the potential problem here is the identification of healthy patients, that is, there is poor specificity of the outcome results (Anon. n.d).

Conclusion

Screening involves procedural tests and examinations carried out on individuals who may be asymptomatic for classification purposes on the likelihood of having certain diseases. It falls under secondary prevention measures, and the effectiveness of screening is determined in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values.

References

Anon. (2003). Screening for Antibody to the Human Immunodeficiency Virus. Web.

Anon. (N.d). Epidemiology Glossary. University of Washington. Web.

Grimes, A, D. and Schulz, F, K. (2002). Uses and Abuses of screening tests. The Lancet, Vol. 359, pp. 881-934.

Hennekens, H. C., Buring, E, J. and Mayrent, L, S. (1987). Epidemiology in medicine. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Web.

More related papers Related Essay Examples
Cite This paper
You're welcome to use this sample in your assignment. Be sure to cite it correctly

Reference

IvyPanda. (2022, March 30). Screening for Diseases as Caution Against Potential Infections. https://ivypanda.com/essays/screening-for-diseases-as-caution-against-potential-infections/

Work Cited

"Screening for Diseases as Caution Against Potential Infections." IvyPanda, 30 Mar. 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/screening-for-diseases-as-caution-against-potential-infections/.

References

IvyPanda. (2022) 'Screening for Diseases as Caution Against Potential Infections'. 30 March.

References

IvyPanda. 2022. "Screening for Diseases as Caution Against Potential Infections." March 30, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/screening-for-diseases-as-caution-against-potential-infections/.

1. IvyPanda. "Screening for Diseases as Caution Against Potential Infections." March 30, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/screening-for-diseases-as-caution-against-potential-infections/.


Bibliography


IvyPanda. "Screening for Diseases as Caution Against Potential Infections." March 30, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/screening-for-diseases-as-caution-against-potential-infections/.

If, for any reason, you believe that this content should not be published on our website, please request its removal.
Updated:
This academic paper example has been carefully picked, checked and refined by our editorial team.
No AI was involved: only quilified experts contributed.
You are free to use it for the following purposes:
  • To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
  • As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
  • As a template for you assignment
1 / 1