Adult preventive health screening — personalised, evidence-based, not a package

About this guide

Health screening sits in a strange place. Patients often arrive having chosen between two extremes:

• Doing nothing — “I feel fine, so why test?”
• Doing everything — an executive package with a long list of tumour markers, scans, and panels, on the assumption that more tests means better care

Both miss the point. The useful middle ground is personalised screening: a plan built from three inputs — the national evidence-based framework, your specific risk profile, and any secondary screening needed for conditions you already have. Plus a review of your vaccinations. This is what we try to do at KTMC.

This guide explains:

• What screening actually is, and the principles that make a test worth doing
• The Singapore Screening Test Review Committee 2026 (STRC 2026) framework and its three tiers
• The Healthier SG and Screen for Life baseline — what the national programmes cover well, and what they don’t
• Why more tests isn’t usually better — the “executive screening package” problem
• Our personalised approach: what we screen, for whom, and when
• Tests we generally don’t use for healthy-adult screening — and why
• Vaccinations as an integral part of every screening visit

What health screening actually is (and isn’t)

Screening means looking for disease in someone who feels well, with the aim of finding it early enough that treatment changes the outcome. Three important distinctions:

• Screening is not diagnosis. A positive screening test usually just identifies someone who needs further testing. Most positives on broad screens are not disease.
• Screening is not surveillance. If you already have diabetes, checking your kidney function and retina is called surveillance (or complication monitoring) — not screening. The rules are different.
• Screening is not “finding something interesting on a scan.” A test only counts as useful screening if finding disease earlier actually improves outcomes.

The World Health Organization has long-standing principles for a test to be worth doing as screening. A condensed version:

1. The condition is an important health problem
2. There is an accepted treatment for the disease
3. Facilities for diagnosis and treatment are available
4. There is a recognisable latent or early symptomatic phase
5. There is a suitable test that is acceptable to the population
6. The natural history of the condition is well understood
7. There is an agreed policy on who to treat
8. The cost of finding cases is reasonable in the context of overall medical expenditure
9. Case-finding should be continuous, not a one-off

If a test fails most of those criteria, “doing it anyway” tends to do more harm than good — through false-positive results that lead to unnecessary biopsies, scans, procedures, and weeks of anxiety, not to mention the financial cost.

The Singapore STRC 2026 framework — three tiers

In February 2026, the Screening Test Review Committee (STRC) — convened by the Academy of Medicine Singapore and the Ministry of Health — published its updated recommendations on which screening tests are worth doing in Singapore, for whom, and how often. The report classifies screening tests into three categories:

• Category 1 — Suitable for population-level screening. Strong evidence that the test reduces deaths or serious illness, is cost-effective for the general population in a defined age range, and is backed by uniform expert recommendations. These tests form the backbone of the national screening programme.
• Category 2 — Suitable for individual-level decision. The test is not cost-effective to offer to everyone, but it is useful in specific higher-risk groups. Whether to do it is a discussion between you and your doctor, based on your particular profile.
• Category 3 — Not recommended. Either the evidence is insufficient, the test is inaccurate enough to cause more harm than good, or the balance of benefits and harms is unfavourable for everyone — including apparently high-risk groups.

This framework is the backbone of our approach. Where a test is Category 1, we offer it on the standard schedule. Where it is Category 2, we discuss it when your risk profile warrants. Where it is Category 3, we will explain why we’re not recommending it, even if you’ve seen it on an executive-screening package menu.

The national baseline — Healthier SG and Screen for Life

Singapore has two connected national programmes you should know about:

• Healthier SG — the preventive-care enrolment programme with your chosen GP, which builds in regular review including weight, blood pressure, and lifestyle, and integrates recommended screening tests into your chronic-care plan
• Screen for Life (SFL) — the subsidised screening service at participating GP clinics, which covers Category 1 screening tests for eligible Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents for a small co-payment (often as low as $0–$5)

Between them, these programmes mean that the Category 1 screening backbone is highly subsidised and easily accessible for most residents. The current Screen for Life package includes, in age-appropriate patients:

• Cardiovascular risk screening — blood pressure (from age 18, opportunistically and at least annually), fasting or non-fasting lipids (from age 40, every 3 years), fasting plasma glucose or HbA1c (from age 40, every 3 years)
• Body composition — BMI and waist circumference (from age 18, annually)
• Female breast cancer screening — mammography (age 40–49 annually; age 50–74 every 2 years)
• Cervical cancer screening — Pap test (women 25–29 every 3 years), HPV testing (women ≥ 30 every 5 years)
• Colorectal cancer screening — FIT (from age 50, annually) or colonoscopy (from age 50, every 5–10 years)

Structured conversations about vaccination, lifestyle, and mental health are expected to be part of the visit.

This is a strong baseline. For a well adult with no significant risk factors, these tests cover most of what screening can usefully do in Singapore today. The programmes are cost-effective, evidence-based, and properly calibrated to the local disease burden.

What the national programmes don’t routinely cover (and why we add it)

The Screen for Life package is designed as a population-level intervention. It captures the biggest risks efficiently at the lowest cost. But a population-level programme doesn’t cover every worthwhile test for every patient. A few gaps we routinely fill:

• Urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) and estimated GFR (eGFR) — early kidney damage is often detectable via albuminuria before eGFR falls. Screen for Life doesn’t currently include UACR or eGFR for the general population, and this is a real gap. In patients with diabetes, high blood pressure, obesity, cardiovascular disease, or a significant family history of kidney disease, we’d include these tests — they genuinely change the treatment picture when abnormal. See our chronic kidney disease guide.
• Thyroid function (TSH) — routine screening isn’t population-level justified, but is often useful in patients presenting with tiredness, weight change, mood symptoms, or a family history of thyroid disease
• Lp(a) — a one-time lipoprotein(a) measurement is now recommended internationally for most adults; see our cholesterol and statins guide. Not yet part of Screen for Life.
• Bone health review — osteoporosis risk assessment (OSTA score) and a decision on whether to do a DXA scan, from age 50 in women and 65 in men (or earlier if risk factors are present)
• Depression and anxiety screen (PHQ-2 or similar) — brief, inexpensive, and often useful, particularly in patients with chronic physical illness
• Hepatitis B and C serology — worth checking at least once in most adults, given the prevalence and the availability of effective treatment
• Vitamin D, B12, iron studies — depending on presenting symptoms and risk (dietary patterns, medications, malabsorption, age)

Some of these will eventually move into the Category 1 population-level tier as evidence accumulates and cost-effectiveness data emerges. The STRC guideline is periodically refreshed (2019, 2026, and expected future updates), and local research continues to inform what gets added. The screening landscape is not static.

Why “more tests” isn’t usually “more health” — the executive package problem

Executive screening packages — particularly those marketed to corporate clients or offered as stand-alone services — often include a long list of tests well beyond the evidence-based backbone. A few patterns worth knowing about:

• Routine breast ultrasound offered as “additional to mammography.” Category 3 in the general population — the STRC notes this significantly raises false positives, adds investigations for benign findings, and doesn’t improve survival. Useful in specific high-risk patients with dense breasts under specialist direction, not as a general add-on.
• Routine chest X-ray as lung cancer screening. Clearly Category 3 — chest X-ray does not reduce lung cancer mortality. The evidence-based test is low-dose CT (LDCT) in the specific high-risk group (age 50–80, ≥20 pack-years of smoking, currently smoking or quit within 15 years).
• Whole-body MRI or whole-body CT screening. No population-level evidence of benefit; high rates of incidental findings leading to more scans and procedures; meaningful radiation exposure in the CT case.
• “Total heart check” panels built around exercise stress testing in asymptomatic adults with no cardiovascular risk factors. The evidence doesn’t support routine stress testing as screening — false positives lead to coronary angiography in people who don’t need it.
• Body fat percentage measurement as a screening metric. STRC classifies this as Category 3; BMI and waist circumference remain the useful measures.
• Routine ECG in healthy asymptomatic adults. Low yield as screening; often produces minor changes that prompt further testing without clear benefit. A focused ECG is useful when clinically indicated, not as a routine screen.
• Wide micronutrient panels, heavy metal screens, “food intolerance” IgG tests, routine hormone panels in the absence of symptoms. Generally Category 3 for screening purposes.
• Broad tumour marker panels as a general “cancer check.” The STRC classifies tumour markers as Category 3 for population-level screening of the major cancers (breast, colorectal, lung) because they miss many cancers, generate meaningful numbers of false positives, and don’t reliably improve survival. They have a different role in patients who specifically request cancer screening — see the dedicated section below — but they don’t belong in a standard package as a substitute for evidence-based screening.

The cost of all this is not only the price tag. False positives cause real harm: weeks of anxiety, unnecessary biopsies and invasive procedures with their own complications, and lingering psychological distress even after the follow-up tests come back clear. In primary care research, this is consistently underestimated — the damage from “just to be safe” testing is real, not theoretical.

We don’t refuse to order specific tests when there is a clinical reason or an informed patient request. But we will be direct if we think a test you’ve seen on a menu is unlikely to help you.

The KTMC approach — personalised screening on three pillars

Rather than start from a package list, we build a screening plan from three inputs:

Pillar 1 — the national evidence-based baseline

Everything in Category 1 of the STRC framework, at the right age and frequency, for the right patient:

• Blood pressure at every visit, at least annually from age 18
• BMI and waist circumference annually from age 18
• Fasting or non-fasting lipids from age 40, every 3 years
• Fasting plasma glucose or HbA1c from age 40, every 3 years
• Mammography for women 40–49 (annually) and 50–74 (every 2 years)
• Cervical screening — Pap test women 25–29 (every 3 years), HPV testing women ≥ 30 (every 5 years)
• Colorectal cancer screening — FIT or colonoscopy from age 50

These are eligible for subsidy under Screen for Life at KTMC, and we help you arrange them as part of your regular review.

Pillar 2 — your specific risks

Over and above the baseline, we individualise based on:

• Family history — particularly of cancer (breast, colorectal, ovarian, pancreatic, prostate, lung), early cardiovascular disease, kidney disease, familial hypercholesterolaemia, inherited cancer syndromes (BRCA, Lynch, familial polyposis)
• Previous history — cancer, cardiovascular event, acute kidney injury, gestational diabetes, pre-eclampsia, significant occupational exposure
• Ethnicity — certain conditions are more common in specific ethnic groups (gastric cancer in Chinese patients; haemoglobinopathies; type 2 diabetes risk varies)
• Lifestyle exposures — smoking history (informs LDCT eligibility), alcohol use, occupation, travel, sexual-health risk factors
• Menstrual and reproductive history — early menopause, multiparity, breastfeeding history (influence breast cancer and osteoporosis risk)
• Medications — long-term corticosteroids, aromatase inhibitors, GnRH therapy, some anticonvulsants, long-term PPIs (all affect bone density); some psychiatric medications (affect metabolic risk)
• Immune status — HIV, solid organ or bone marrow transplant, long-term immunosuppression (affects cervical cancer screening frequency and vaccination priorities)
• Your own specific concerns — a recent news story, a family member’s diagnosis, a new symptom. Worth addressing directly rather than dismissed.

Where your profile places you in a Category 2 (high-risk) group for a test that wouldn’t be offered to everyone, we discuss whether and when to do it. Concrete examples:

• LDCT for lung cancer — if you meet the ≥ 20 pack-year criterion (currently smoking or quit ≤ 15 years ago) and are aged 50–80
• Mammography + MRI breast — for BRCA1/2 carriers or women with strong family history of breast cancer without a proven mutation
• Colonoscopy starting earlier than 50 — for a first-degree relative with colorectal cancer diagnosed before 60, or specific polyposis or Lynch syndromes
• Bone density (DXA) scan — for high-risk OSTA score or high-risk medication history
• Annual screening for diabetes or lipids before age 40 — if there are risk factors (strong family history, PCOS, prior gestational diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular disease, CKD)
• Cervical cancer screening at higher frequency — in immunocompromised women

Pillar 3 — secondary screening for existing conditions

This pillar is often forgotten in screening conversations, because it isn’t technically “screening” in the pure sense — but it matters just as much. If you have a diagnosed chronic condition, there are specific follow-up checks that detect complications early. We build these into your visits.

Diabetes — retinal photography annually, foot examination with monofilament annually, UACR annually, eGFR 1–2 times per year, HbA1c every 3–6 months, lipid panel annually, mood screen at least yearly, dental review annually. See our diabetes preventive care guide.

Hypertension — BP at every visit, eGFR and UACR at least annually, lipid panel, HbA1c if risk factors, fundal examination if indicated, ECG at diagnosis and periodically, sleep apnoea screening if resistant or symptoms suggest

Cardiovascular disease or high CV risk — lipids at least annually, HbA1c if diabetic, BP, weight, depression screen, medication review

Chronic kidney disease — eGFR and UACR at a frequency matched to your stage (every 1–4 months in higher-risk, every 6–12 months in lower-risk); vaccinations including Hepatitis B, flu, pneumococcal, shingles. See our CKD guide.

Post-cancer surveillance — individualised to the cancer type and treatment received, coordinated with your oncologist

Osteoporosis — follow-up DXA every 1–3 years where indicated, bone profile, vitamin D

Atopic conditions (asthma, eczema) — control-focused rather than screening-focused; regular review of triggers, technique, and medication

This secondary-screening pillar is the clearest reason to have a consistent primary care doctor rather than drifting between clinics. The pattern of checks makes sense when someone holds the whole picture.

Age-based screening roadmap — most adults at a glance

Not a substitute for a personalised conversation, but a reasonable starting picture:

Ages 18–29

• Blood pressure annually
• BMI and waist circumference annually
• Smoking and alcohol review; mental health check-in
• Women 25–29: Pap test every 3 years
• Sexual health screening where risk factors are present
• Vaccinations — HPV if not previously given (up to age 26 in most protocols; older if specific indications); Hepatitis B if not immune; MMR and varicella if not immune; Tdap booster every 10 years; annual flu vaccine

Ages 30–39

• Above, plus:
• Women ≥ 30: HPV testing every 5 years (replaces Pap)
• Fasting or non-fasting lipids if cardiovascular risk factors or family history
• HbA1c / FPG if metabolic risk factors
• Depression and stress screen if indicated

Ages 40–49

• Above, plus:
• Lipid panel every 3 years (Screen for Life)
• HbA1c or FPG every 3 years (Screen for Life)
• Women: annual mammography begins (Screen for Life covers 40–49 annually)
• Vaccinations — consider pneumococcal and HPV if not previously vaccinated and higher risk

Ages 50–64

• Above, plus:
• Colorectal screening — FIT annually (Screen for Life) or colonoscopy every 5–10 years
• Women: mammography every 2 years (Screen for Life 50–74)
• Osteoporosis risk assessment from 50 in women using OSTA; DXA if risk factors present
• Lung cancer screening with LDCT if ≥ 20 pack-years of smoking (currently smoking or quit ≤ 15 years ago)
• Vaccinations — Shingrix (shingles) from age 50 (or from age 18 with certain chronic conditions under NAIS), pneumococcal vaccination as per schedule, annual flu, Tdap every 10 years

Ages 65 and above

• Above, plus:
• Osteoporosis risk in men from age 65
• Consider frailty, falls, cognitive, and functional assessments
• Influenza, pneumococcal, shingles, and other adult vaccinations reviewed annually
• Medication review (deprescribing conversation where appropriate)

Continuing screening in older adults becomes more individualised, particularly where life expectancy, comorbidity burden, or treatment preferences make intensive screening less likely to benefit. We discuss this openly rather than quietly drop tests.

When patients want broader cancer screening — tumour markers, GAAD, and emerging tests

Patients often arrive wanting to be reassured that they don’t have cancer. This is an entirely reasonable thing to want — and the evidence-based screening backbone (mammography, cervical, colorectal) only covers a subset of cancers. Nasopharyngeal cancer, liver cancer, gastric cancer, and pancreatic cancer — all more common in Asian populations than in Western benchmarks — sit largely outside the national screening programme. Patients with a family history of cancer, or with a specific concern, often want to go further.

We respond to this in two ways:

1. We keep the evidence-based backbone central. Mammography, cervical screening, and colorectal screening are the single biggest cancer-related interventions for most adults. No cancer panel replaces these.
2. We offer specific additional cancer-screening tests when patients request them, after a proper conversation about what each test can and cannot tell us.

The tests we routinely offer in this category, with honest framing:

Traditional tumour markers

CEA, CA15-3, CA19-9, AFP, CA-125 (and PSA in men) are proteins produced by certain cancers. They are familiar to many patients because they have been marketed in executive packages for years.

What patients should know:

• They are not sensitive enough to reliably detect early cancer. Many cancers produce normal tumour marker levels; many benign conditions produce raised levels.
• A raised level does not mean cancer. Common causes of raised tumour markers include smoking, benign inflammation, liver disease, pregnancy, ovarian cysts, and simply random biological variation.
• A normal level does not rule out cancer. You can have a significant cancer with normal markers.
• A positive result usually triggers further testing — imaging, sometimes endoscopy, sometimes a biopsy — with real cost and real anxiety attached, often for findings that turn out to be benign.
• Used with other tests, they can add incremental information — for example, an elevated AFP alongside a liver ultrasound changes the picture for liver cancer surveillance. This is why we use them selectively, not as a general “cancer check.”

If you specifically want these tests, we’ll do them — but we’ll discuss what a positive or borderline result will mean before we order it, so the downstream conversation isn’t a surprise.

EBV DNA testing for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC)

Plasma Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) DNA by PCR detects viral DNA fragments associated with NPC. This test is more specific for NPC than general tumour markers, and it has been studied in local and regional screening populations. Useful particularly in:

• Adults of Chinese ancestry (NPC incidence is higher in Southern Chinese populations)
• Anyone with a family history of NPC
• Patients with persistent unilateral ear symptoms, nasal bleeding, neck lumps — though those are clinical evaluation rather than screening

GAAD testing

GAAD testing is a blood-based algorithm combining specific biomarkers with demographic factors (age, sex) to produce a risk score for specific cancers. We offer GAAD testing at KTMC for patients concerned about nasopharyngeal and gastric cancer — both of which carry meaningful Singapore-relevant incidence and are not covered by the national screening programme. The result is a structured risk score rather than a simple positive-or-negative, which helps the downstream conversation.

PCR-based circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) tests

An emerging class of blood tests that detect DNA fragments shed by tumours into the bloodstream. These are now being evaluated as potential multi-cancer early-detection (MCED) tools, with some panels checking for signatures from dozens of cancers at once.

Honest framing:

• The evidence base is still maturing. Large trials (such as the NHS-Galleri trial in the UK) are running; early results are promising for some cancers but not yet definitive for population-level screening.
• Cost is meaningful — these tests are private-pay at current pricing.
• Downstream implications of a positive result are significant and not yet fully standardised — a positive signal may not identify the tissue of origin clearly, leading to extensive follow-up imaging.
• Category placement in the STRC framework — these tests are not yet recommended for population-level screening and are best described as informed, patient-preference additions.

We offer PCR-based cancer screening tests when patients specifically ask about them, with a proper discussion of what the test can and can’t do, what a positive result triggers, and what it costs.

The framing we use

Patient-preference cancer screening is a legitimate part of a screening plan, provided it is layered on top of the evidence-based backbone rather than replacing it. We don’t recommend these tests as routine; we don’t refuse them if you’re informed and want to do them. What we will always do is explain what each test actually tells you, and what each result actually means.

Tests that really aren’t useful as screening

Separate from the cancer-screening conversation above, there is a list of tests that don’t help regardless of patient preference — either because they’ve been replaced by better tests, or because the false-positive burden outweighs any information gained. We do not recommend these:

• Routine ultrasound breast as a general population screen (different role in specific high-risk patients with dense breasts under specialist direction)
• Abdominal X-ray or abdominal CT as a general screen
• Chest X-ray as lung cancer screening (LDCT is the evidence-based test, in the right high-risk group only)
• Quantitative ultrasound of the calcaneum (QUS) for osteoporosis — DXA is the proper test
• Serum calcium, ESR, serum phosphate as osteoporosis screening
• Body fat percentage measurement — BMI and waist are the useful measures
• Routine ECG in asymptomatic adults without cardiovascular risk factors
• Whole-body MRI or CT as a screening tool — no evidence of population benefit; high incidental finding rates
• Routine coronary calcium scoring in low-risk adults with no family history and no risk factors
• Broad micronutrient panels, “food intolerance” IgG testing, routine hormone panels when no clinical symptoms

We’d always rather explain why we aren’t recommending a test than silently decline it. If you’ve been told to do any of these by a non-medical source, please bring it up — the conversation is often worthwhile.

Vaccinations — part of every screening visit

Vaccinations are the other half of preventive care, and they are easily neglected once childhood is past. We review vaccination status at every screening visit and catch up where needed. The National Adult Immunisation Schedule (NAIS) covers:

• Annual influenza vaccine — for everyone, particularly over 65 and those with chronic conditions
• Pneumococcal vaccine — PCV20, or PCV15 followed by PPSV23, for adults with chronic conditions and for everyone over 65
• Shingrix (recombinant zoster vaccine) — two doses, from age 50, or from age 18 with certain chronic conditions under the current subsidy arrangements
• Tdap (tetanus, diphtheria, pertussis) — every 10 years, with particular attention around close contacts of newborns
• Hepatitis B — for adults not previously vaccinated, particularly with risk factors or chronic kidney disease
• Measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) and varicella — for adults without documented immunity
• HPV vaccine — catch-up in adults not previously vaccinated, especially with specific risk factors
• COVID-19 boosters — as recommended, particularly in higher-risk groups
• Travel-specific vaccines — typhoid, hepatitis A, Japanese encephalitis, rabies, yellow fever — planned in advance of travel

Many of these are subsidised under NAIS and available through HSG/CHAS. We’ll tell you what you’re due for at every review.

The screening landscape is not static

Two predictions that should shape how you think about screening over the next decade:

1. More conditions will move into Category 1. As evidence of benefit and cost-effectiveness accumulates, things currently done only in high-risk patients (like LDCT for smokers, or possibly eGFR/UACR more broadly) may be added to the population-level programme. It’s worth re-checking your screening plan every few years rather than assuming “I did a package once, I’m done.”
2. Some tests currently marketed for screening will drop away; others will be added. As we get clearer evidence on false-positive harms and downstream costs, some current tests will lose their place. At the same time, emerging biomarker-based tests — multi-cancer early detection panels, liquid-biopsy technologies, and better risk-stratification tools — may well move into Category 1 or 2 over the next few years as larger trials mature.

This is why we consider screening as part of your ongoing care with us, rather than as a one-off event. The recommendation for you at 35 will not be the same as the one at 55.

The Singapore context — practical access and cost

• Healthier SG Chronic Tier — patients enrolled with us can have Category 1 screening tests arranged at subsidised rates, with preventive-care review built into the plan
• Screen for Life (SFL) — Singapore Citizens and PRs can have the Category 1 screening tests at participating GPs for as little as $0–$5 per test. Available at KTMC for all eligible patients.
• CHAS — means-tested subsidies for consultations and specific health services at participating GP clinics. Pioneer Generation, Merdeka Generation, CHAS Blue / Orange / Green tiers apply. More at chas.sg.
• MediSave — usable for selected screening tests and vaccinations, up to the annual MediSave limit (currently $500, rising to $700 / $1,000 from January 2027)
• Private-pay screening — when tests fall outside national subsidies (e.g. LDCT for lung cancer in eligible smokers, certain specialist scans, or extended panels), we’ll be direct about cost and any lower-cost alternatives

What a KTMC screening visit looks like

For a new patient wanting a proper screening review:

1. A conversation — your history, family history, symptoms you may not have mentioned, medications, lifestyle, what you’re worried about, what you’re hoping to find out
2. A physical examination — blood pressure, weight, BMI, waist, heart and lung examination, any area of specific concern
3. An individualised plan — based on the STRC 2026 framework plus your specific profile. We go through what we’re recommending and why, including tests we’re not recommending
4. Blood and urine tests at the clinic — typically including lipid panel, FPG or HbA1c, eGFR, UACR (where indicated), depending on your profile
5. Arrangements for other tests — mammography, FIT (sometimes the kit goes home with you), DXA or other scans where appropriate
6. A vaccination review — what you’re due for and when
7. A follow-up conversation once results are back — we interpret everything together, agree on next steps, and set a review interval

For patients enrolled under Healthier SG, much of this integrates into your regular chronic-care plan rather than being a one-off.

Get in touch

Joo Chiat — 172 Joo Chiat Road, #01-01, Singapore 427443 · Tel 6920 1952

Punggol — 658 Punggol East, #01-04, Singapore 820658 · Tel 6312 4589

Email — admin@ktmc.sg

References

Singapore screening framework and national programmes

• Academy of Medicine Singapore / Ministry of Health. Report of the Screening Test Review Committee 2026, Volume 1. February 2026.
• Ministry of Health, Singapore. Screen for Life programme. screenforlife.sg
• Ministry of Health, Singapore. Healthier SG programme. healthiersg.gov.sg
• Health Promotion Board, Singapore. National Adult Immunisation Schedule (NAIS). healthhub.sg
• Community Health Assist Scheme. chas.sg

Principles of screening

• Wilson JMG, Jungner G. Principles and practice of screening for disease. WHO, Geneva, 1968. (The original screening principles, still the foundation of modern practice.)
• Andermann A, Blancquaert I, Beauchamp S, Déry V. Revisiting Wilson and Jungner in the genomic age: a review of screening criteria over the past 40 years. Bull World Health Organ. 2008;86(4):317–319.

Specific conditions referenced

• Agency for Care Effectiveness (ACE). Lipid management — focus on cardiovascular risk. ACE Clinical Guideline, Ministry of Health, Singapore. December 2023 (v1.1, 2025).
• Agency for Care Effectiveness (ACE). Chronic kidney disease — delaying progression and reducing cardiovascular complications. ACE Clinical Guidance, October 2023.
• Agency for Care Effectiveness (ACE). Osteoporosis — diagnosis and management. ACE Clinical Guidance, 2025.

On the harms of over-screening and false positives

• Welch HG, Schwartz LM, Woloshin S. Overdiagnosed: Making People Sick in the Pursuit of Health. Beacon Press, 2011.
• Brodersen J, Schwartz LM, Heneghan C, O’Sullivan JW, Aronson JK, Woloshin S. Overdiagnosis: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ Evid Based Med. 2018;23:1–3.

This information is for general education only and is not a substitute for medical advice. A proper screening plan is personalised to your age, sex, risk profile, existing conditions, and preferences — please speak with our team. v2.0 · April 2026 · Review due April 2028.