Following is the criteria for a screening test EXCEPT:

HP CHO -9 October 2022

Community Health Nursing

Easy

Appeared in: HP CHO -9 October 2022

Explanation

The statement 'Disease should have low prevalence' is incorrect and thus the answer to this 'EXCEPT' question.
For a screening program to be cost-effective and efficient, the disease should have a relatively high prevalence in the population being screened.
Screening for a rare (low prevalence) disease results in a low positive predictive value (PPV), meaning a high number of false-positive results.
This leads to unnecessary anxiety, further diagnostic testing, and inefficient use of healthcare resources.
The established Wilson-Jungner criteria explicitly state the condition should be an important health problem, which is often correlated with high prevalence.

Option A: This is a valid and fundamental criterion for screening. Resources are allocated to screen for diseases that have a significant impact on the population's health.
Option B: This is a critical ethical and practical requirement. It is unethical to identify individuals with a potential disease through screening without having the means to confirm the diagnosis and offer treatment.
Option D: This is a valid criterion. A screening program cannot succeed if the target population is unwilling to participate. The test must be acceptable in terms of comfort, convenience, cost, and cultural sensitivity.

Clinical Relevance

Nursing practice connection: This is primarily an exam-oriented knowledge point with limited direct bedside application, so retain Principles and criteria for public health screening programs as background academic context rather than a clinical decision trigger.
Nurses play a vital role in educating patients and the community about the purpose, benefits, and limitations of screening tests, including the possibility of false positives and false negatives.
Understanding the criteria for screening helps nurses advocate for sensible public health policies and guide patients in making informed decisions about participation.
What if a new, extremely cheap, and non-invasive test is developed for a rare but serious disease? Even with low prevalence, the cost-benefit analysis might shift, potentially making screening justifiable if the benefits of early detection clearly outweigh the harms of over-diagnosis and false positives.

How to Approach the Question

First, identify the negative keyword 'EXCEPT'. This tells you to look for the one option that is NOT a valid criterion.
Recall or look up the fundamental principles of public health screening, often summarized by the Wilson-Jungner criteria.
Evaluate each option against these principles.
Option A ('important health problem') is a core principle.
Option B ('facility for diagnosis and treatment') is an ethical necessity.
Option D ('acceptable to the population') is a practical necessity for participation.

Concept Tested & Keywords

Concept Tested: Principles and criteria for public health screening programs.
Stem keywords: criteria, screening test
Lead-in keywords: EXCEPT
Negative lead-in flag: The question asks for the EXCEPTION among the given options.

QdFbuh-0v7BXUbg6RnRrZg

E6 Parks TextBook of Preventive & Social Medicine part 1 — Subpart A (pp 26-201 of 604) p. 138-140