Key result
General health checks did not reduce total mortality (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.95-1.03), cardiovascular mortality, or cancer mortality based on a review of 16 randomized trials.
Why the study?
Do general health checks reduce total or cause-specific mortality in the general population?
Do general health checks reduce total or cause-specific mortality in the general population?
Relative Risk: 0.99 (95% CI 0.95–1.03)
General health checks do not appear to reduce total, cardiovascular, or cancer mortality, suggesting the practice should be reconsidered.
It’s time to let them go We check our cars regularly, so why shouldn’t we also check our bodies so that we can find and treat abnormalities before they cause too much harm? It seems so easy, but the human body is not a car, and, in contrast to a car, it has self healing properties. Actually, the first thing we know about screening is that it will cause harm in some people. This is why we need randomised trials to find out whether screening does more good than harm before we decide whether to introduce it. Doctors realised this early on and embarked on 16 randomised trials of general health checks between 1963 and 1999. A Cochrane review from 2012 that included 11 940 deaths did not find an effect of general health checks on total mortality (risk ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 1.03) or on mortality due to cardiovascular disease (1.03, 0.91 to 1.17) or cancer (1.01, 0.92 to 1.12).1 2 These trials were carried out in Europe and in the United States. The most recent one, the Danish Inter99 trial, which started in 1999, reports its results …
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gøtzsche et al. (2014) conducted an editorial in General health. General health checks was evaluated on total mortality (risk ratio 0.99, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.03). General health checks did not reduce total mortality (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.95-1.03), cardiovascular mortality, or cancer mortality based on a review of 16 randomized trials.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: