GuidelineBMC medical research methodology2002
Statistical issues in randomized trials of cancer screening.
Guideline in BMC medical research methodology, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Meta-analysis of breast cancer mortality benefit and overdiagnosis adjusted for adherence: improving information on the effects of attending screening mammography.British journal of cancer · 2016Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Lung cancer screening for never smokers: current evidence and future directions.Singapore medical journal · 2026Review
- Design considerations and challenges in the CHinA National CancEr Screening (CHANCES) trial and Tomosynthesis Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (TMIST).Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2025Article
- Article
- Causal Proportional Hazards Estimation with a Binary Instrumental Variable.Statistica Sinica · 2021Article
- Limitations in the Effect of Screening on Breast Cancer Mortality.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2018Observational
- The WISDOM Personalized Breast Cancer Screening Trial: Simulation Study to Assess Potential Bias and Analytic Approaches.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2018Article
- Response.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2017Article
- Prostate cancer mortality in areas with high and low prostate cancer incidence.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2014Article
- Breast cancer mortality in participants of the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program.Cancer · 2013Article
- Most breast cancer screening trials have a flawed design.The Indian journal of surgery · 2011Article
- Cancer screening trials: nuts and bolts.Seminars in oncology · 2010Article
- Improving the biomarker pipeline to develop and evaluate cancer screening tests.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2009Article
- Early reporting for cancer screening trials.Journal of medical screening · 2008Article
- Comparing breast cancer mortality rates before-and-after a change in availability of screening in different regions: extension of the paired availability design.BMC medical research methodology · 2004Article
- Estimating the cumulative risk of false positive cancer screenings.BMC medical research methodology · 2003Article
- Using observational data to estimate an upper bound on the reduction in cancer mortality due to periodic screening.BMC medical research methodology · 2003Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe evaluation of randomized trials for cancer screening involves special statistical considerations not found in therapeutic trials. Although some of these issues have been discussed previously, we present important recent and new methodologies.
methodsOur emphasis is on simple approaches.
resultsWe make the following recommendations: (1) Use death from cancer as the primary endpoint, but review death records carefully and report all causes of death; (2) Use a simple "causal" estimate to adjust for nonattendance and contamination occurring immediately after randomization; (3) Use a simple adaptive estimate to adjust for dilution in follow-up after the last screen
conclusionThe proposed guidelines combine recent methodological work on screening endpoints and noncompliance/contamination with a new adaptive method to adjust for dilution in a study where follow-up continues after the last screen. These guidelines ensure good practice in the design and analysis of randomized trials of cancer screening.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.