| 1. |
-
- 2019
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 2. |
- Ancelle-Park, R., et al.
(författare)
-
Summary of the evidence of breast cancer service screening outcomes in Europe and first estimate of the benefit and harm balance sheet
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Journal of Medical Screening. - : SAGE Publications. - 0969-1413 .- 1475-5793. ; 19, s. 5-13
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives To construct a European 'balance sheet' of key outcomes of population-based mammographic breast cancer screening, to inform policy-makers, stakeholders and invited women. Methods From the studies reviewed, the primary benefit of screening, breast cancer mortality reduction, was compared with the main harms, over-diagnosis and false-positive screening results (FPRs). Results Pooled estimates of breast cancer mortality reduction among invited women were 25% in incidence-based mortality studies and 31% in case-control studies (38% and 48% among women actually screened). Estimates of over-diagnosis ranged from 1% to 10% of the expected incidence in the absence of screening. The combined estimate of over-diagnosis for screened women, from European studies correctly adjusted for lead time and underlying trend, was 6.5%. For women undergoing 10 biennial screening tests, the estimated cumulative risk of a FPR followed by non-invasive assessment was 17%, and 3% having an invasive assessment. For every 1000 women screened biennially from age 50-51 until age 68-69 and followed up to age 79, an estimated seven to nine lives are saved, four cases are over-diagnosed, 170 women have at least one recall followed by non-invasive assessment with a negative result and 30 women have at least one recall followed by invasive procedures yielding a negative result. Conclusions The chance of saving a woman's life by population-based mammographic screening of appropriate quality is greater than that of over-diagnosis. Service screening in Europe achieves a mortality benefit at least as great as the randomized controlled trials. These outcomes should be communicated to women offered service screening in Europe.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Beck, S., et al.
(författare)
-
Experimenting with Open Innovation in Science (OIS) practices: A novel approach to co-developing research proposals
- 2021
-
Ingår i: CERN IdeaSquare Journal of Experimental Innovation. - 2413-9505. ; 5:2, s. 28-49
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Co-producing scientific research with those who are affected by it is an emerging phenomenon in contemporary science. This article summarizes and reflects on both the process and outcome of a novel experiment to co-develop scientific research proposals in the field of Open Innovation in Science (OIS), wherein scholars engaged in the study of open and collaborative practices collaborated with the “users” of their research, i.e., scientists who apply such practices in their own research. The resulting co-developed research proposals focus on scientific collaboration, open data, and knowledge sharing and are available as an appendix to this article.
|
|
| 5. |
- Beck, S., et al.
(författare)
-
The Open Innovation in Science research field: a collaborative conceptualisation approach
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Industry and Innovation. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1366-2716 .- 1469-8390. ; 29:2, s. 136-185
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Openness and collaboration in scientific research are attracting increasing attention from scholars and practitioners alike. However, a common understanding of these phenomena is hindered by disciplinary boundaries and disconnected research streams. We link dispersed knowledge on Open Innovation, Open Science, and related concepts such as Responsible Research and Innovation by proposing a unifying Open Innovation in Science (OIS) Research Framework. This framework captures the antecedents, contingencies, and consequences of open and collaborative practices along the entire process of generating and disseminating scientific insights and translating them into innovation. Moreover, it elucidates individual-, team-, organisation-, field-, and society-level factors shaping OIS practices. To conceptualise the framework, we employed a collaborative approach involving 47 scholars from multiple disciplines, highlighting both tensions and commonalities between existing approaches. The OIS Research Framework thus serves as a basis for future research, informs policy discussions, and provides guidance to scientists and practitioners.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Biganzoli, L., et al.
(författare)
-
The requirements of a specialist breast centre
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Breast. - : Elsevier BV. - 0960-9776 .- 1532-3080. ; 51, s. 65-84
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This article is an update of the requirements of a specialist breast centre, produced by EUSOMA and endorsed by ECCO as part of Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care (ERQCC) programme, and ESMO. To meet aspirations for comprehensive cancer control, healthcare organisations must consider the requirements in this article, paying particular attention to multidisciplinarity and patient-centred pathways from diagnosis, to treatment, to survivorship. The centrepiece of this article is the requirements section, comprising definitions; multidisciplinary structure; minimum case, procedure and staffing volumes; and detailed descriptions of the skills of, and resources needed by, members and specialisms in the multidisciplinary team in a breast centre. These requirements are positioned within narrative on European breast cancer epidemiology, the standard of care, challenges to delivering this standard, and supporting evidence, to enable a broad audience to appreciate the importance of establishing these requirements in specialist breast centres. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
