Health Tips

The government estimates that more than 15,000 women died last year from ovarian cancer.

But routine screening of women with no symptoms isn’t recommended by the United States Preventive Services Task Force, American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists or other professional groups, even for women at high risk for the disease. That’s because the benefits of the available tests — a transvaginal ultrasound and a blood test that detects an antigen called CA-125 — haven’t been shown to outweigh their risks (such as complications from unnecessary surgery), or to reduce the number of deaths.

Despite that evidence, a new study finds that when presented with a scenario of a woman coming to her annual check-up, a significant percentage of physicians surveyed would screen for ovarian cancer.

Some 28.5% of the 1,088 primary-care docs  — OB/GYNs, family physicians and general internists — surveyed said they “sometimes” or “almost always” offered or ordered ovarian-cancer screening tests for low-risk women. When the vignette involved a woman at medium risk of the disease, that proportion jumped to 65.4% of physicians.

About a third of physicians reported believing that ultrasound or CA-125 blood testing is an effective screening test for ovarian cancer, the study found. It’s unclear why that is, and more research is needed to discover why, says Laura-Mae Baldwin, an author of the study and professor of family medicine at the University of Washington.

“We know that in medicine we have an enthusiasm for screening,” she says. “We want to find diseases before they can cause harm.”

The study also found that physicians were more likely to say they’d order screening for patients who requested it — even if the doctor herself didn’t believe screening was effective.

In that scenario, physicians may be trying to maintain a relationship with the patient, or they “may lack confidence in explaining why the test is more harmful than beneficial,” says Baldwin. She says there’s an important role for clinical tools that could accurately illustrate the level of risk faced by a particular woman and also illustrate the harms and benefits of the test.

The study is published in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

There are limitations to the research: doctors were reporting how they’d react to the scenarios presented to them, not discussing actual patients. And while there was a 62% response rate to the initial questionnaire sent to physicians, the results may not generalize to the doctors who didn’t respond, the authors write.

Image: iStockphoto

from: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/wsj/health/feed/~3/cdEwni4znF0/

Ever clam up at a meeting even though you knew a lot and wanted to contribute? Have you tripped over yourself as you tried to explain a complex subject? Have you felt tongue-tied when the spotlight turns to you at a party? You’re not alone. WSJ’s Bonds columnist Elizabeth Bernstein writes this week about research which shows that some people become, in effect, less intelligent when in professional or social gatherings.

Elizabeth will take reader questions in a live chat on Tuesday, Feb. 7 at 12 p.m. ET. The chat will be moderated by Personal Journal news editor Laura Bird. Ask your questions now.

from: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/wsj/health/feed/~3/RF2GniZNC2c/

Does online dating work?

Well, it’s a great way to meet people, but not for leading you to the partner of your dreams, according to a comprehensive new review published in this month’s issue of the journal Psychological Science in the Public Interest.

The authors, all academic researchers without any financial ties to dating services, combed through the literature on relationships (those begun both on- and offline)  and other areas of psychology to take a stab at answering the question.

Using an internet dating site has the advantage over in-person dating in expanding one’s access to the dating pool. That’s especially helpful for people who tend to face more limited opportunities, such as working, single parents without much free time or those with a minority sexual orientation, says study author Eli Finkel, a psychology professor at Northwestern University. In addition, users know immediately that their matches are available and interested in a romantic relationship, in contrast to the uncertainties surrounding meeting someone in, say, a bar.

But, the typical online dating site — where individuals view profiles of those to whom they are matched based on certain characteristics or values — doesn’t improve one’s chance of meeting a compatible mate, according to Finkel.

That’s because it’s really hard to judge chemistry or rapport — so-called “experiential” information — from searchable information, like height, age and education. And, people may not even make decisions based on the characteristics they say are important — they might say kindness is important, for example, but then not go for the super-kind people any more frequently than someone who says intelligence is really important. Ultimately, this means that online services are matching people based on characteristics that haven’t been shown to predict relationship success, says Finkel.

A prime example is similarity, which some dating sites say is the key to finding a suitable mate and serves as the basis for complicated matching algorithms.  In relationship research, similarity between couples doesn’t well predict the long-term success of the relationship. Rather, people simply perceive that they are more similar to people they like, says Finkel.

The take-home message isn’t that people should stop on-line dating, says Finkel. Rather they should “use the online dating site to get off-line,” he says.

Don’t spend extensive periods of time scouring profiles and interacting electronically. Instead, use the profiles to find people who look interesting or appealing, then relatively quickly try to meet that person — in a public setting, for safety’s sake — to assess whether that spark is there in-person, he says.

Those who like to go out and are willing to be spontaneous may find more success using new “mobile” dating options where users are see via smartphone who else signed up for the service is near where they are, and can immediately meet up for coffee to assess whether there’s chemistry, says Finkel.

“There’s no substitute for face-to-face communication,” says Finkel.

Bonus: The Psychology of Online Dating

Image: iStockphoto

from: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/wsj/health/feed/~3/XD0E-Cim7do/