Navigating the uncertainties of screening: the contribution of social theory
Screening programmes are social interventions as much as they are medical, and as such they benefit from scrutiny informed by social theory. Screening gives rise to a range of uncertainties and the debates and controversies that result are rarely confined to policy makers and health professionals. Contestations about the science underlying screening are common, and frequently enter the public sphere, engaging with wider societal themes and normative questions. The uncertainties of screening and the need to balance potential benefits against possible harms are often underestimated and underrepresented within these. In this paper, I consider the contribution of social theory to navigating the uncertainties of screening. In doing so, I focus in particular on two relatively recent developments: first, the marked shift, at least in policy terms, towards screening based on an individual’s informed consent, having weighed up the possible harms and benefits; and second, the emerging focus on overdiagnosis and overtreatment. I highlight some important ways in which social theory can add value by helping us gain analytical purchase on these issues.
KeywordsScreening Uncertainty Sociology Theory Overdiagnosis
Natalie Armstrong is supported by a Health Foundation Improvement Science Fellowship.
- Armstrong, D. 1983. Political anatomy of the body. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- BMJ. 2017. http://www.bmj.com/too-much-medicine. Accessed 29 Apr 2017.
- Burrows, R., S. Nettleton, and R. Bunton. 1995. Sociology and health promotion: Health, risk and consumption under late modernism. In The sociology of health promotion: Critical analyses of consumption, lifestyle and risk, ed. R. Bunton, S. Nettleton, and R. Burrows, 1–9. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Castel, R. 1991. From dangerousness to risk. In The foucault effect, ed. G. Burchell, C. Gordon, and P. Miller, 281–298. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
- Choosing Wisely UK. 2017. http://www.choosingwisely.co.uk/. Accessed 29 Apr 2017.
- Conrad, P. 2007. The medicalization of society: On the transformation of human conditions into treatable disorders. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
- Green, J. 2004. The new public health. In Key concepts in medical sociology, ed. J. Gabe, M. Bury, and M.A. Elston, 233–237. London: Sage.Google Scholar
- Gummersbach, E., G. Piccoliori, C. Oriol Zerbe, A. Altiner, C. Othman, C. Rose, and H.H. Abholz. 2010. Are women getting relevant information about mammography screening for an informed consent: A critical appraisal of information brochures used for screening invitation in Germany, Italy, Spain and France. European Journal of Public Health 20 (4): 409–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hersch, J., A. Barratt, J. Jansen, L. Irwig, K. McGeechan, G. Jacklyn, H. Thornton, H. Dhillon, N. Houssami, and K. McCaffery. 2015. Use of a decision aid including information on overdetection to support informed choice about breast cancer screening: A randomised controlled trial. The Lancet 385 (9978): 1642–1652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hood, C. 2011. The blame game: Spin, bureaucracy, and self-preservation in government. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Howson, A. 1998. Embodied obligation: The female body and health surveillance. In The body in everyday life, ed. S. Nettleton, and J. Watson, 218–240. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Lupton, D. 1995. The imperative of health. London: Sage.Google Scholar
- Nettleton, S. 1995. The sociology of health and illness. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
- Nettleton, S., and R. Bunton. 1995. Sociological critiques of health promotion. In The sociology of health promotion, ed. R. Bunton, R. Burrows, and S. Nettleton, 41–58. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- NHS Choices. 2017. http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/Screening/Pages/screening.aspx. Accessed 21 Apr 2017.
- Petersen, A., and D. Lupton. 1996. The new public health: health and self in the age of risk. London: Sage.Google Scholar
- Power, M. 1997. The audit society: Rituals of verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Steinberg, D.L. 1996. Languages of risk: Genetic encryptions of the female body. Women: A Cultural Review 7: 259–270.Google Scholar
- UK National Screening Committee. 2017a. https://www.gov.uk/government/groups/uk-national-screening-committee-uk-nsc. Accessed 21 Apr 2017.
- UK National Screening Committee. 2017b. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/nhs-population-screening-explained. Accessed 21 Apr 2017.
- Zapka, J.G., B.M. Geller, J.L. Bulliard, J. Fracheboud, H. Sancho-Garnier, and R. Ballard-Barbash. 2006. Print information to inform decisions about mammography screening participation in 16 countries with population-based programs. Patient Education and Counseling 63 (1–2): 126–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar