a on behalf of the EU-TOPIA consortium 1

Background: Populations differ with respect to their cancer risk and screening preferences, which may influence the performance of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs. This review aims to systematically compare the mortality effect of CRC screening across European regions. Methods: Six databases including Embase, Medline, Web of Science, PubMed publisher, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies published before March 2018. Bibliographic searches were conducted to select studies assessing the effect of various screening tests (guaiac fecal occult blood test [gFOBT]; flexible sigmoidoscopy [FS]; fecal immunochemical test [FIT] and colonoscopy) on CRC mortality in Europe (PROSPERO protocol: CRD42016042433). Abstract reviewing, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently by two reviewers. Results: A total of 18 studies were included; of which, 11 were related to gFOBT, 4 to FS, 2 to FIT and 1 to colonoscopy; 8 were randomised clinical trials, and 10, observational studies, and an approximately equal number of studies represented Northern, Western and Southern European regions. Among individuals invited to screening, CRC mortality reductions varied from 8% to 16% for gFOBT and from 21% to 30% for FS. When studies with a high risk of bias were considered, ranges were more extensive. The estimated effectiveness of gFOBT and FS screening appeared similar across different European regions.

Following the introduction of unprecedented "stay-at-home" national policies, the COVID-19 pandemic recently started declining in Europe. Our research aims were to characterize the changepoint in the flow of the COVID-19 epidemic in each European country and to evaluate the association of the level of social distancing with the observed decline in the national epidemics. Interrupted time series analyses were conducted in 28 European countries. Social distance index was calculated based on Google Community Mobility Reports. Changepoints were estimated by threshold regression, national findings were analyzed by Poisson regression, and the effect of social distancing in mixed effects Poisson regression model. Our findings identified the most probable changepoints in 28 European countries. Before changepoint, incidence of new COVID-19 cases grew by 24% per day on average. From the changepoint, this growth rate was reduced to 0.9%, 0.3% increase, and to 0.7% and 1.7% decrease by increasing social distancing quartiles. The beneficial effect of higher social distance quartiles (i.e., turning the increase into decline) was statistically significant for the fourth quartile. Notably, many countries in lower quartiles also achieved a flat epidemic curve. In these countries, other plausible COVID-19 containment measures could contribute to controlling the first wave of the disease. The association of social distance quartiles with viral spread could also be hindered by local bottlenecks in infection control. Our results allow for moderate optimism related to the gradual lifting of social distance measures in the general population, and call for specific attention to the protection of focal micro-societies enriching high-risk elderly subjects, including nursing homes and chronic care facilities.

Background: The aim of this study was to quantify the impact of organised mammography screening on breast cancer mortality across European regions. Therefore, a systematic review was performed including different types of studies from all European regions and stringently used clearly defined quality appraisal to summarise the best evidence. Methods: Six databases were searched including Embase, Medline and Web of Science from inception to March 2018. To identify all eligible studies which assessed the effect of organised screening on breast cancer mortality, two reviewers independently applied predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Original studies in English with a minimum follow-up of five years that were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or observational studies were included. The Cochrane risk of bias instrument and the NewcastleeOttawa Scale were used to assess the risk of bias. Results: Of the 5015 references initially retrieved, 60 were included in the final analysis. Those comprised 36 cohort studies, 17 caseecontrol studies and 7 RCTs. None were from Eastern Europe. The quality of the included studies varied: Nineteen of these studies were of very good or good quality. Of those, the reduction in breast cancer mortality in attenders versus non-

BackgroundEvaluation of integrated care programmes for individuals with multi-morbidity requires a broader evaluation framework and a broader definition of added value than is common in cost-utility analysis. This is possible through the use of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA).Methods and resultsThis paper presents the seven steps of an MCDA to evaluate 17 different integrated care programmes for individuals with multi-morbidity in 8 European countries participating in the 4-year, EU-funded SELFIE project. In step one, qualitative research was undertaken to better understand the decision-context of these programmes. The programmes faced decisions related to their sustainability in terms of reimbursement, continuation, extension, and/or wider implementation. In step two, a uniform set of decision criteria was defined in terms of outcomes measured across the 17 programmes: physical functioning, psychological well-being, social relationships and participation, enjoyment of life, resilience, person-centeredness, continuity of care, and total health and social care costs. These were supplemented by programme-type specific outcomes. Step three presents the quasi-experimental studies designed to measure the performance of the programmes on the decision criteria. Step four gives details of the methods (Discrete Choice Experiment, Swing Weighting) to determine the relative importance of the decision criteria among five stakeholder groups per country. An example in step five illustrates the value-based method of MCDA by which the performance of the programmes on each decision criterion is combined with the weight of the respective criterion to derive an overall value score. Step six describes how we deal with uncertainty and introduces the Conditional Multi-Attribute Acceptability Curve. Step seven addresses the interpretation of results in stakeholder workshops.DiscussionBy discussing our solutions to the challenges involved in creating a uniform MCDA approach for the evaluation of different programmes, this paper provides guidance to future evaluations and stimulates debate on how to evaluate integrated care for multi-morbidity.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3367-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.