We report baseline results of a community-based, targeted, low-dose CT (LDCT) lung cancer screening pilot in deprived areas of Manchester. Ever smokers, aged 55-74 years, were invited to 'lung health checks' (LHCs) next to local shopping centres, with immediate access to LDCT for those at high risk (6-year risk ≥1.51%, PLCO calculator). 75% of attendees (n=1893/2541) were ranked in the lowest deprivation quintile; 56% were high risk and of 1384 individuals screened, 3% (95% CI 2.3% to 4.1%) had lung cancer (80% early stage) of whom 65% had surgical resection. Taking lung cancer screening into communities, with an LHC approach, is effective and engages populations in deprived areas.

No abstract

Dental screening of children in schools is undertaken in many countries. There is no evidence that this activity is effective. The objective of our study was to determine if school dental screening of children reduces untreated disease or improves attendance at the population level. A four-arm cluster-randomized controlled trial was undertaken in the northwest of England. In total, 16,864 children aged 6-9 years in 168 schools were randomly allocated to 3 test groups, which received screening according to different models, and a control, which received no intervention. There were no significant differences in caries increment in the primary and secondary dentitions or in the proportions of children attending a dentist after screening between the control group and the 3 intervention arms. School dental screening delivered according to 3 different models was not effective at reducing levels of active caries and increasing attendance in the population under study.

No abstract

No abstract

We report results from the second annual screening round (T1) of Manchester’s ‘Lung Health Check’ pilot of community-based lung cancer screening in deprived areas (undertaken June to August 2017). Screening adherence was 90% (n=1194/1323): 92% of CT scans were classified negative, 6% indeterminate and 2.5% positive; there were no interval cancers. Lung cancer incidence was 1.6% (n=19), 79% stage I, treatments included surgery (42%, n=9), stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (26%, n=5) and radical radiotherapy (5%, n=1). False-positive rate was 34.5% (n=10/29), representing 0.8% of T1 participants (n=10/1194). Targeted community-based lung cancer screening promotes high screening adherence and detects high rates of early stage lung cancer.

This paper outlines the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence's (NICE) emerging conceptual framework for public health. This is based on the experience of the first 3 years of producing public health guidance at NICE (2005-2008). The framework has been used to shape the revisions to NICE's public health process and methods manuals for use post 2009, and will inform the public health guidance which NICE will produce from April 2009. The framework is based on the precept that both individual and population patterns of disease have causal mechanisms. These are analytically separate. Explanations of individual diseases involve the interaction between biological, social and related phenomena. Explanations of population patterns involve the same interactions, but also additional interactions between a range of other phenomena working in tandem. These are described. The causal pathways therefore involve the social, economic and political determinants of health, as well as psychological and biological factors. Four vectors of causation are identified: population, environmental, organizational and social. The interaction between the vectors and human behaviour are outlined. The bridge between the wider determinants and individual health outcomes is integration of the life course and the lifeworld.

Background Previous evaluations of low-dose CT (LDCT) lung cancer screening programmes have taken very different approaches in the design of the informative trials and the methods applied to determine cost-effectiveness. Therefore, it has not been possible to determine if differences in costeffectiveness are due to different screening approaches or the evaluation methodology. This study reports the findings of an evaluation of the first round of a community-based, LDCT screening pilot Manchester, applying previously published methodology to ensure consistency.