Mapping of stakeholder perspectives in cancer screening

This study addresses the contentious issue of widespread population screening for cancer, which has led to significant variations in screening guidelines and their application in clinical practice. While guidelines should be based on medical evidence, their impact on actual practice remains limited. The study aims to construct a theoretical framework to understand the reasons behind these variations, exploring heterogeneity in screening tests. Previously collected qualitative evidence is employed, including a focused review of qualitative data analysis techniques in healthcare. Interviews with healthcare professionals, including patients, academics, clinicians, media and science reporters, and policy makers from guideline issuing organizations that were conducted in previous research are employed, with data processed using the Atlas.ti software. The research is a second coding that focuses on the evolution of over and under-screening, considering the decisions and perceptions of stakeholders, including the influence of advocacy groups, media, policymakers, and academics. The findings emphasize the complex decision-making process and the interplay of various factors between these groups. The study aims to uncover trends, variations, and emerging themes in screening guidelines and their actual practices.