BACKGROUND: Screening for @entity5 has become a standard of practice in contemporary health care. Screening tests are often ordered routinely, without discussion of risks and benefits. For clinicians who want to inform @entity1 and undertake shared decision-making, the goal of effective communication presents a number of challenges. To begin with, the probabilities to be discussed are small. For each screening test done, the chance of finding and effectively treating an early @entity5 is quite low. Likewise, the chance of causing harm, such as a false positive screen followed by an invasive test resulting in complications, is also very unlikely but possible. Using accurate terms that @entity1 can understand is only the first step, however, as the decision-making process should take into account the @entity1 's perceptions, values, and preferences. This paper briefly reviews the current state of evidence for prostate, colon, and @entity0 screening, then outlines several strategies toward effective clinical communication. The concepts of absolute risk, relative risk, and number needed to screen are reviewed. Natural frequency presentation, a relatively new method for portraying benefits and harms, is introduced and encouraged, as recent evidence suggests that natural frequencies are better understood and are more concordant with @entity1 ' values than alternative formats.

Communicating benefits and risks of screening for prostate, colon, and XXXX .

@entity5 :: ('MESH:D009369', 'Disease') :: ['cancer'] @entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['patients', 'patient'] @entity0 :: ('MESH:D001943', 'Disease') :: ['breast cancer']
@entity0 :: (MESH:D001943,Disease) :: ['breast cancer']
