Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12804462›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2003

Regular self-examination or clinical examination for early detection of breast cancer.

J P Kösters, P C Gøtzsche

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03936842 (Evaluation of an Educational Intervention for Women With Breast Pain), which is not on this map. Cited by 96 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
96citing papers in PubMed, 14 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03936842 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Evaluation of an Educational Intervention for Women With Breast Pain

TypeinterventionalSponsorRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation TrustRan2019 to 2019Enrolled15ConditionsBreast Pain, MastalgiaArmsBreast Pain video, Semi-structure interviews
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

96 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 369 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Interventions for raising breast cancer awareness in women.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  10. Screening for breast cancer with mammography.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  11. Recommendations on screening for breast cancer in average-risk women aged 40-74 years.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2011
    Guideline
  12. Pooled it
  13. Guideline
  14. Pooled it
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Random Cross-Sectional Determination of the Level of Awareness Among Female Saudi Patients About Breast Cancer.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2016
    Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Article
  20. Article

36 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

J P KöstersNordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Dept. 7112, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. mbx59852@cochrane.dk
P C Gøtzsche
Cochrane · DKRigshospitalet · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBreast self-examination and clinical breast examination have been promoted for many years as general screening methods to diagnose breast cancer at an earlier stage in order to decrease morbidity and or mortality. The possible benefits and harms remain unclear.

objectivesTo determine whether screening for breast cancer by regular self-examination or clinical breast examination reduces breast cancer mortality and morbidity. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Library and Medline were searched for randomised trials; date of last search October 2002. The specialised register maintained by the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group was searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised clinical trials, including cluster randomised trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Decisions on which trials to include were taken independently by the reviewers based on the methods of trial. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. Intention to treat analyses were conducted using a fixed effect model with 95% confidence intervals. MAIN

resultsTwo large population-based studies (388,535 women) from Russia and Shanghai that compared breast self-examination with no intervention were included. There was no statistically significant difference in breast cancer mortality, relative risk 1.05 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.24) (587 deaths in total). In Russia, more cancers were found in the breast self-examination group than in the control group (relative risk 1.24, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.41), while this was not the case in Shanghai (relative risk 0.97, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.06). Almost twice as many biopsies (3406) with benign results were performed in the screening group compared to the control group (1856), relative risk 1.89, 95% CI 1.79 to 2.00. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsData from two large trials do not suggest a beneficial effect of screening by breast self-examination whereas there is evidence for harms. There were no randomised trials of clinical breast examination. At present, breast self-examination cannot be recommended.

Indexed as

Physical ExaminationBreast NeoplasmsBreast Self-ExaminationFemaleHumans

Identifiers

PMID12804462
PMCPMC7387360
OpenAlexW1616483941

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.