ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2005
Model of outcomes of screening mammography: information to support informed choices.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 3 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
45 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Patient preferences for breast cancer screening: a systematic review update to inform recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.Systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Is there excess mortality in women screened with mammography: a meta-analysis of non-breast cancer mortality.Trials · 2013Pooled it
- Screening for breast cancer with mammography.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Trial
- Conjoint analysis versus rating and ranking for values elicitation and clarification in colorectal cancer screening.Journal of general internal medicine · 2012Trial
- What is the point: will screening mammography save my life?BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2009Trial
- Clinician and patient perspectives on screening mammography among women age 75 and older: A pilot study of a novel decision aid.PEC innovation · 2023Article
- Impact of a risk based breast screening decision aid on understanding, acceptance and decision making.NPJ breast cancer · 2023Article
- Long-term psychosocial consequences of false-positive screening mammography: a cohort study with follow-up of 12-14 years in Denmark.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Considerations for Evaluating the Introduction of New Cancer Screening Technology: Use of Interval Cancers to Assess Potential Benefits and Harms.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
- Cost-Effectiveness of Screening Mammography Beyond Age 75 Years : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.Annals of internal medicine · 2022Article
- Breast Cancer Screening: Is There Room for De-escalation?Current breast cancer reports · 2022Review
- Article
- Cancer Screening in Older Adults: Individualized Decision-Making and Communication Strategies.The Medical clinics of North America · 2020Review
- Cancer Screening Among Older Adults: a Geriatrician's Perspective on Breast, Cervical, Colon, Prostate, and Lung Cancer Screening.Current oncology reports · 2020Review
- Overdiagnosis of breast cancer in population screening: does it make breast screening worthless?Cancer biology & medicine · 2017Article
- Decision-Making Regarding Mammography Screening for Older Women.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2016Article
- Common methods of measuring 'informed choice' in screening participation: Challenges and future directions.Preventive medicine reports · 2016Review
- Utilization of screening mammography in older women according to comorbidity and age: protocol for a systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2016Article
- Optimal breast cancer screening strategies for older women: current perspectives.Clinical interventions in aging · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo provide easy to use estimates of the benefits and harms of biennial screening mammography for women aged 40, 50, 60, and 70 years.
designMarkov process model, with data from BreastScreen Australia, the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, and the Australian Bureau of Statistics.
main outcome measureAge specific outcomes expressed per 1000 women over 10 years.
resultsFor every 1000 women screened over 10 years, 167-251 (depending on age) receive an abnormal result; 56-64 of these women undergo at least one biopsy, 9-26 have an invasive cancer detected by screening, and 3-6 have ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) detected by screening. More breast cancers (both invasive and DCIS) are diagnosed among screened than unscreened women. For example, among 1000 women aged 50 who have five biennial screens, 33 breast cancers are diagnosed: 28 invasive cancers (18 detected at screening and 10 interval cancers) and five DCIS (all detected at screening). By comparison, among 1000 women aged 50 who decline screening, 20 cancers are diagnosed over 10 years. There are about 0.5, 2, 3, and 2 fewer deaths from breast cancer over 10 years per 1000 women aged 40, 50, 60, and 70, respectively, who choose to be screened compared with women who decline screening at times determined by relevant policy.
conclusionBenefits and harms of screening mammography are relatively finely balanced. Quantitative estimates such as these can be used to support individual informed choices about 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.