"Every year" is the default answer most people give when asked how often they should be screened for anything — and it's wrong for almost every screening that actually matters. Intervals are set deliberately, based on how quickly a given condition typically progresses and how much a test costs in false positives and unnecessary follow-up when repeated too often. Here's what the evidence-graded intervals actually are.
Recommended intervals, by screening
| Screening | Interval | Who |
|---|---|---|
| Blood pressure | Ongoing / at each visit | Adults 18+ |
| Colorectal cancer | FIT every 2 years, or colonoscopy every 10 years | Adults 45–75 |
| Breast cancer | Mammography every 2 years | Women 40–74 |
| Cervical cancer | Cytology every 3 years, or HPV testing every 5 years | Women 21–65 |
| Lung cancer | Low-dose CT annually | Adults 50–80 with 20 pack-year history |
| Prediabetes/Type 2 diabetes | Periodic (no fixed interval specified) | Adults 35–70 with overweight/obesity |
| Osteoporosis | Periodic based on risk | Women 65+ |
| Hepatitis C | One-time | Adults 18–79 |
| Abdominal aortic aneurysm | One-time | Men 65–75 who have ever smoked |
The pattern is deliberate: fast-moving or high-consequence conditions get shorter intervals (annual lung cancer CT for high-risk smokers), slow-moving conditions get longer ones (a 10-year colonoscopy interval reflects how slowly most colorectal cancers develop from polyps), and one-time tests are reserved for conditions that, once ruled out at the right age, rarely need rechecking (an AAA that hasn't developed by 75 is very unlikely to appear later).
Why more frequent isn't automatically better
Every screening test carries a false-positive rate, and every false positive triggers follow-up testing, anxiety, and in some cases invasive procedures for something that was never actually there. Testing more often than the evidence supports doesn't just cost more — for imaging-based screening in particular, it can cause net harm at the population level. This is precisely why USPSTF intervals are the product of formal evidence review, not convention.
Where fixed intervals make less sense
Population screening intervals assume a roughly average risk profile and roughly stable biology between visits. Biomarker tracking works differently: once you have a baseline, the value of a repeat panel is in seeing your own trend line — whether your fasting insulin, ApoB, or inflammatory markers are moving in a direction worth addressing — rather than following a population-wide interval built for a single yes/no diagnosis. Most Aeonix clients test annually for this reason: often enough to see meaningful trend data, not so often that noise gets mistaken for signal.
Aeonix — Own Your Health
Up to 150+ clinically validated biomarkers. Physician-reviewed results in 48 hours. Renowned Swiss lab. GDPR-compliant.
Join Waitlist NowSources
- U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. "A and B Recommendations." uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org. Accessed September 2026.