Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15717814›Full record

ArticleHealth care management science2004

Breast cancer screening services: trade-offs in quality, capacity, outreach, and centralization.

Evrim D Güneş, Stephen E Chick, O Zeynep Akşin

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Health care management science, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Evrim D GüneşTechnology Management Area, INSEAD, Fontainebleau, Boulevard de Constance, 77305 Fontainebleau, France. egunes@ku.edu.tr
Stephen E Chick
O Zeynep Akşin

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This work combines and extends previous work on breast cancer screening models by explicitly incorporating, for the first time, aspects of the dynamics of health care states, program outreach, and the screening volume-quality relationship in a service system model to examine the effect of public health policy and service capacity decisions on public health outcomes. We consider the impact of increasing standards for minimum reading volume to improve quality, expanding outreach with or without decentralization of service facilities, and the potential of queueing due to stochastic effects and limited capacity. The results indicate a strong relation between screening quality and the cost of screening and treatment, and emphasize the importance of accounting for service dynamics when assessing the performance of health care interventions. For breast cancer screening, increasing outreach without improving quality and maintaining capacity results in less benefit than predicted by standard models.

Indexed as

Quality of Health CareBreast NeoplasmsCommunity Health ServicesCosts and Cost AnalysisDisease ProgressionFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedModels, Organizational

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.