Abstract
The United States Preventive Services Task Force is perhaps America's best-known source of evidence-based medicine (EBM) recommendations. This paper reviews aspects of the history of one such recommendation-screening for colorectal cancer (CRC)-to explore how the Task Force evaluates the best available evidence to reach its conclusions.Although the Task Force initially believed there was inadequate evidence to recommend CRC screening in the 1980s, it later changed its mind. Indeed, by 2002, it was recommending screening colonoscopy for those aged 50 and older, "extrapolating" from the existing evidence as there were no randomized controlled trials of the procedure. By 2016, due in part to the use of an emerging analytic modality known as modeling, the Task Force supported four additional CRC screening tests that lacked randomized data. Among the reasons the Task Force gave for these decisions was the desire to improve adherence for a strategy-screening healthy, asymptomatic individuals-that it believed saved lives.During these same years, the Task Force diverged from other organizations by declining to advocate screening otherwise healthy Black patients earlier than age 50-despite the fact that such individuals had higher rates of CRC than the general population, higher mortality from the disease and earlier onset of the disease. In declining to extrapolate in this instance, the Task Force underscored the lack of reliable data that proved that the benefits of such testing would outweigh the harms.The history of CRC screening reminds us that scientific evaluation relies not only on methodological sophistication but also on a combination of intellectual, cognitive and social processes. General internists-and their patients-should realize that EBM recommendations are often not definitive but rather thoughtful data-based advice.