Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19589820›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2009

Overdiagnosis and mammography screening.

H Gilbert Welch

Abstract readEditorialComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Skeptical reactions to breast cancer screening benefits and harms: Antecedents, consequences, and implications for screening communication.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A decision support system for mammography reports interpretation.Health information science and systems · 2020
    Article
  9. The incidence of breast cancer in Canada 1971-2015: trends in screening-eligible and young-onset age groups.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Methodologic approaches to evaluating new highly sensitive diagnostic tests: avoiding overdiagnosis.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2017
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Evidence, values, guidelines and rational decision-making.Journal of general internal medicine · 2012
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Hormone replacement therapy and the risk of breast cancer.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2011
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

H Gilbert Welch

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Diagnostic ErrorsBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMammographySensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID19589820

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.