HPSC ADO Screening key terms

A brief, standardized procedure used to identify people who may need further evaluation, distinguishing those at likely risk from those probably unaffected before any diagnostic workup begins.

A comprehensive, individualized evaluation conducted after a positive screen to confirm or rule out a condition, clarify severity, and inform treatment planning and referral decisions.

The proportion of people in a given population who actually have the condition at a specified time, which strongly influences how many positive screening results are truly correct.

The proportion of a defined population that has the condition at a particular point or over a stated period, shaping expected yields and predictive values in screening settings.

The number of new cases of a condition arising in a population during a specified period, useful for tracking emergence of problems but less directly tied to screening yield than prevalence.

The proportion of people who truly have the condition and are correctly identified as positive by the screening test; high sensitivity means few true cases are missed.

The proportion of people who do not have the condition and are correctly identified as negative by the screening test; high specificity means few unaffected people are flagged.

The proportion of people with a positive screening result who actually have the condition, which depends heavily on the base rate in the screened population.

The proportion of people with a negative screening result who truly do not have the condition, indicating how much reassurance a negative screen reasonably provides.

A screening result that flags a person as likely to have the condition when they do not, leading to unnecessary follow-up, cost, and possible anxiety or stigma.

A screening result that classifies a person as unaffected when they actually have the condition, delaying identification and needed services.

The threshold on a screening measure that separates results treated as positive from those treated as negative, set by weighing missed cases against over-identification.

A plot of sensitivity against the false positive rate across all possible cutoffs, used to compare screening instruments and choose thresholds for a given purpose.

A single summary index of a screening measure's ability to discriminate affected from unaffected people, ranging from 0.5 for chance to 1.0 for perfect separation.

A ratio expressing how much a given screening result changes the odds that a person has the condition, calculated from sensitivity and specificity.

The consistency of screening results across repeated administrations, raters, or items, indicating how much variation is due to measurement error rather than true differences.

The degree to which a screening instrument measures what it is intended to measure and supports the interpretations and decisions made from its scores.

The extent to which screening scores agree with an established reference standard or later outcome, often reported as concurrent or predictive validity.

Evidence that a screening instrument behaves as expected relative to the theoretical trait it measures, shown through relationships with related and unrelated measures.

The best available reference method for determining whether a person truly has the condition, against which a screening test's accuracy is judged.

Using fixed administration, scoring, and interpretation procedures so that screening results are comparable across people, settings, and time.

A score interpreted by comparing it with the distribution of results from a defined reference group, often expressed as a percentile or standard score.

The consistency of scores when the same screening measure is administered to the same people on two occasions, reported as a correlation or agreement statistic.

The degree to which different administrators or scorers produce consistent results for the same person, important for screens involving observation or clinical judgment.

The extent to which items on a screening instrument measure the same underlying construct, commonly summarized by coefficients such as alpha or omega.

Distortion of a screening test's accuracy when it is validated on a group whose condition severity or case mix differs from the population where it will be used.

The screening result level at which a person is sent for further evaluation or services, balancing the risks of missed cases against burden on referral resources.

Administering a screening measure to every person in a defined population regardless of apparent risk, intended to catch problems that would otherwise go unnoticed.

Screening only people who meet predetermined risk criteria, such as known exposures or family history, to improve yield and reduce unnecessary testing.

Identifying a condition opportunistically during contact with services for another reason, rather than through a planned, population-wide screening program.

The time between scheduled repeat screenings, chosen to balance detection of new cases against cost, burden, and the natural history of the condition.

Apparent improvement in outcomes caused solely by detecting a condition earlier, which lengthens survival time without necessarily changing when disease would have ended.

Overrepresentation of slowly progressing cases among screen-detected cases, because slow disease remains detectable longer and is more likely to be caught.

Detection of a condition that would never have caused symptoms or harm during the person's lifetime, leading to unnecessary treatment and labeling.

Disclosing the purpose, possible benefits, harms, and follow-up implications of screening so a person can decide voluntarily whether to participate.

Modifying a screening instrument's language, examples, and response expectations so it remains valid and acceptable for a specific cultural or linguistic group.

Ongoing monitoring of screening procedures, scoring accuracy, and follow-up completion to ensure the program delivers consistent, defensible results over time.

Systematically tracking what happens after screening, including referral completion and later status, to judge whether the program is achieving its intended benefit.