Table 1 Minimal, aspirational and contested criteria for good personal health checks as formulated by interviewed providers
From: What is a good health check? An interview study of health check providers’ views and practices
Minimal criteria | Treatability of (risk factors for) disease: Health check results must provide clear opportunities for health improvement |
Clinical validity: Health check results must be valid and reliable indicators for (risk factors for) disease | |
Informed consent: Participation must be voluntary and based on reliable information | |
Health checks should provide more benefits than harms | |
In case of population screenings: cost-effectiveness | |
Aspirational criteria | Follow-up care should be provided, including objective explanation of test-results and facilitation in the realization of health benefits |
Providers should be skilled and experienced professionals that put the benefit of (potential) users first | |
Providers should take time and attention | |
Contested criteria | People should be free to test on any (risk factor for) disease, provided they are well-informed |
Assessment before the test: Health checks should only be performed in people at high risk for disease | |
Follow up care of privately funded tests should not drain on collective resources |