PubMed · 7934524
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
J Black. 1994-10-22. Polio eradication.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7934524/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Public health interventions need justification because they intrude on individual rights and incur economic costs. Coercive interventions can be justified in only 3 cases: to avert a risk of serious harm to other persons, to protect the welfare of incompetent persons, and, most controversially, to prevent a risk to the person himself/herself. This article proposes a systematic evaluation of public health regulation. The article recommends that public health authorities should bear the burden of justification and, therefore, should demonstrate (1) a significant risk based on scientific evidence; (2) the intervention's effectiveness by showing a reasonable fit between means and ends; (3) that economic costs are reasonable; (4) that human rights burdens are reasonable; and (5) that benefits, costs, and burdens are fairly distributed. The 3 articles in this series have sought to provide a fuller understanding of the varied ways in which law can advance the public's health. Public health law should be seen broadly as the government's power and responsibility to ensure the conditions for the population's health. As such, public health law has transcending importance in how we think about government, politics, and policy. JAMA. 2000.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
CONTEXT: Increased 5-year survival for cancer patients is generally inferred to mean that cancer treatment has improved and that fewer patients die of cancer. Increased 5-year survival, however, may also reflect changes in diagnosis: finding more people with early-stage cancer, including some who would never have become symptomatic from their cancer. OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship over time between 5-year cancer survival and 2 other measures of cancer burden, mortality and incidence. DESIGN AND SETTING: Using population-based statistics reported by the National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program, we calculated the change in 5-year survival from 1950 to 1995 for the 20 most common solid tumor types. Using the tumor as the unit of analysis, we correlated changes in 5-year survival with changes in mortality and incidence. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The association between changes in 5-year survival and changes in mortality and incidence measured using simple correlation coefficients (Pearson and Spearman). RESULTS: From 1950 to 1995, there was an increase in 5-year survival for each of the 20 tumor types. The absolute increase in 5-year survival ranged from 3% (pancreatic cancer) to 50% (prostate cancer). During the same period, mortality rates declined for 12 types of cancer and increased for the remaining 8 types. There was little correlation between the change in 5-year survival for a specific tumor and the change in tumor-related mortality (Pearson r=.00; Spearman r=-.07). On the other hand, the change in 5-year survival was positively correlated with the change in the tumor incidence rate (Pearson r=+. 49; Spearman r=+.37). CONCLUSION: Although 5-year survival is a valid measure for comparing cancer therapies in a randomized trial, our analysis shows that changes in 5-year survival over time bear little relationship to changes in cancer mortality. Instead, they appear primarily related to changing patterns of diagnosis. JAMA. 2000.