Report in English with a Dutch summary (KCE reports 45A)

KCE reports vol.45 Screening for Colorectal Cancer 9
Co-interventions
Co-morbidity
Comparison
group
Compliance
Confidence
interval
Confounding
Confounding
variable,
Confounder
Continous
screening
Control event
rate
Cost-benefit
analysis
Costeffectiveness
analysis
Costminimisation
analysis
Follow-up of exposed and non-exposed defined groups, with a
comparison of disease rates during the time covered.)
Interventions other than the treatment under study that are applied
differently to the treatment and control groups. Cointervention is a
serious problem when double blinding is absent or when the use of
very effective non-study treatments is permitted.
Coexistence of a disease or diseases in a study participant in addition
to the index condition that is the subject of study.
Any group to which the index group is compared. Usually synonymous
with control group.
Refers to completion of all tests or examinations when sequential
offers are made to the same persons regardless of whether they
completed a prior test
The range of numerical values in which we can be confident (to a
computed probability, such as 95%) that the population value being
estimated will be found. Confidence intervals indicate the strength of
evidence; where confidence intervals are wide, they indicate less
precise estimates of effect. The larger the trial's sample size, the larger
the number of outcome events and the greater becomes the
confidence that the true relative risk reduction is close to the value
stated. Thus the confidence intervals narrow and "precision" is
increased. In a "positive finding" study the lower boundary of the
confidence interval, or lower confidence limit, should still remain
important or clinically significant if the results are to be accepted. In a
"negative finding" study, the upper boundary of the confidence interval
should not be clinically significant if you are to confidently accept this
result.
A situation in which the measure of the effect of an exposure on risk is
distorted because of the association of exposure with other factor(s)
that influence the outcome under study.
A third variable that indirectly distorts the relationship between two
other variables, because it is independently associated with each of the
variables.A variable that can cause or prevent the outcome of interest,
is not an intermediate variable, and is associated with the factor under
investigation. A confounding variable may be due chance or bias. Unless
it is possible to adjust for confounding variables, their effects cannot be
distinguished from those of factor(s) being studied.
Periodic provision of an opportunity for diagnostic testing to a
population of individuals who are asymptomatic and at increased risk
for disease (or perception of increased risk)
The percentage of the control/nonexposed group who experienced
outcome in question.
A form of economic evaluation in which an attempt is made to value
the consequences or benefits of a medical intervention in monetary
terms so that these may be compared with the costs.
A form of economic evaluation in which the consequences or benefits
of medical interventions are measured in terms of an appropriate
health effect, such as life years saved, without placing a monetary value
on such effects. These are balanced against the monetary cost of the
intervention.
A form of economic evaluation in which it can be shown that outcomes
are identical and, therefore, only costs are compared.
Cost-utility A form of economic evaluation in which the consequences or benefits