The renewal of the National Cervical Screening Program

Brian Cox
Med J Aust 2017; 206 (6): . || doi: 10.5694/mja16.01228
Published online: 3 April 2017

I question that clinicians and the public may be reassured that the evidence underpinning the renewal of the National Cervical Screening Program (NCSP) is sound.1 A fundamental aspect of the sensitivity of a screening test is the definition of the disease of interest that the test seeks to detect. For cancer screening, it is disease that will progress to life-threatening cancer and not the sensitivity to detect disease that only may progress to cancer.2,3 It is a very common but profound error to consider these equivalent,2 particularly when comparing two tests that measure different aspects of the disease process. Overdiagnosis and regression biases are avoided by using the interval cancer method to estimate sensitivity.2,3

  • Brian Cox

  • University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand


Competing interests:

No relevant disclosures.


remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.