Principles and Practice of Screening for Disease¶
Wilson, J. M. G., & Jungner, G. (1968). Principles and Practice of Screening for Disease.
Retired. This entry was not a citation. Our extractor stored an inline prose definition from the article as though it were a bibliographic record, so its title is the name of a concept rather than of a published work. The page is kept because links to it still resolve, but it is withdrawn from the reference list. This entry is kept so the citations that pointed at it still resolve, and so the correction is visible rather than silent.
Cited by¶
2 citations across 2 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Mechanisms¶
- Coarse Screening Checklist
- It is the human analogue of a high-sensitivity screen — sized to catch nearly all true cases at the cost of forwarding false alarms.
This sourceWilson and Jungner describe a high-sensitivity screen as catching nearly all true cases while accepting more false positives. They do not identify the mechanism's checklist as a human analogue of such a screen.
- It is the human analogue of a high-sensitivity screen — sized to catch nearly all true cases at the cost of forwarding false alarms.
- Health Checkup
- The classic misuse is screening for conditions that fail the Wilson–Jungner criteria
This sourceWorld Health Organization. Public Health Papers No. 34. (1968). Sets criteria for justified screening, including effective early treatment, favorable outcomes, acceptable tests, and costs balanced against health-care expenditure, while warning against detection without benefit.
- The classic misuse is screening for conditions that fail the Wilson–Jungner criteria
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. Neither this nor any other of the 2 citations of this work carries a recorded support check.
Was it audited? Yes. A second, independent pass read the citation against the article text and recorded a verdict.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Links previously used in the corpus¶
Before the registry existed this work was also linked 2 other ways.
- https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/37650/.WHO_PHP_34.pdf?sequence=17 ×1
- https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/37650 ×1
Registry ID ref:6e7faac9ae13 · see in the full table