Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19920273›Full record

SynthesisAnnals of internal medicine2009

Screening for breast cancer: an update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Heidi D Nelson, Kari Tyne, Arpana Naik, Christina Bougatsos, Benjamin K Chan, Linda Humphrey, U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Annals of internal medicine, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03928886 (Discomfort Assessment of Senographe Pristina Patient-assisted Versus Standard Compression Mode in Asymptomatic Adult Women Undergoing Screening Full-filled Digital Mammography and Quality Evaluation of Screening Mammograms), which is not on this map. Cited by 433 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
433citing papers in PubMed, 10 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.

NCT03928886 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

Discomfort Assessment of Senographe Pristina Patient-assisted Versus Standard Compression Mode in Asymptomatic Adult Women Undergoing Screening Full-filled Digital Mammography and Quality Evaluation of Screening Mammograms

TypeinterventionalSponsorParc de Salut MarRan2017 to 2020Enrolled500ConditionsMammography Related DiscomfortArmsbilateral two-view (CC and MLO) FFDM (full field digital mammography) using patient-assisted compression mode, bilateral two-view (CC and MLO) FFDM (full field digital mammography) using standard compression mode
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

433 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  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. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Heidi D NelsonOregon Health & Science University, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Portland, OR 97239-3098, USA. nelsonh@ohsu.edu
Kari Tyne
Arpana Naik
Christina Bougatsos
Benjamin K Chan
Linda Humphrey
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

Funding

Statistical Coordinating Center for the Breast Cancer Surveillance ConsortiumU01CA086076 · NCI · KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN OF WASHINGTON · PI MIGLIORETTI, DIANA L · 2000 to 2011
$8.5M
IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF MAMMOGRAPHIC INTERPRETATIONU01CA063731 · NCI · KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN OF WASHINGTON · PI BUIST, DIANA SM · 1994 to 2011
$6.7M
VERMONT BREAST CANCER SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMU01CA070013 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT &ST AGRIC COLLEGE · PI GELLER, BERTA M · 1995 to 2011
$6.7M
UTILITY AND OUTCOMES FROM MAMMOGRAPHY IN NORTH CAROLINAU01CA070040 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI YANKASKAS, BONNIE C · 1995 to 2011
$6.4M
San Francisco Mammography Registry-A Research SourceU01CA063740 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI KERLIKOWSKE, KARLA M · 1994 to 2011
$6.2M
STRATEGIC STUDIES IN BREAST CANCER SURVEILLANCEU01CA086082 · NCI · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI ONEGA, TRACY · 2000 to 2011
$4.9M
REFERRAL PATTERNS AND COST ANALYSIS OF SCREENING MAMMOGRAPHY--FOLLOW-UP/BIOPSYU01CA063736 · NCI · COOPER INSTITUTE · PI CUTTER, GARY · 1994 to 2004
$2.7M
NEW MEXICO MAMMOGRAPHY PROJECTU01CA069976 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO · PI ROSENBERG, ROBERT D · 1995 to 2005
$2.7M
NCI NIH HHS U01 CA063731NCI NIH HHS U01 CA063736NCI NIH HHS U01 CA063740NCI NIH HHS U01 CA069976NCI NIH HHS U01 CA070013NCI NIH HHS U01 CA070040NCI NIH HHS U01 CA086076NCI NIH HHS U01 CA086082NCI NIH HHS U01CA63731NCI NIH HHS U01CA63736NCI NIH HHS U01CA63740NCI NIH HHS U01CA69976NCI NIH HHS U01CA70013NCI NIH HHS U01CA70040NCI NIH HHS U01CA86076NCI NIH HHS U01CA86082PHS HHS 290-02-0024
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis systematic review is an update of evidence since the 2002 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation on breast cancer screening. PURPOSE: To determine the effectiveness of mammography screening in decreasing breast cancer mortality among average-risk women aged 40 to 49 years and 70 years or older, the effectiveness of clinical breast examination and breast self-examination, and the harms of screening. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through the fourth quarter of 2008), MEDLINE (January 2001 to December 2008), reference lists, and Web of Science searches for published studies and Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium for screening mammography data. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized, controlled trials with breast cancer mortality outcomes for screening effectiveness, and studies of various designs and multiple data sources for harms. DATA EXTRACTION: Relevant data were abstracted, and study quality was rated by using established criteria. DATA SYNTHESIS: Mammography screening reduces breast cancer mortality by 15% for women aged 39 to 49 years (relative risk, 0.85 [95% credible interval, 0.75 to 0.96]; 8 trials). Data are lacking for women aged 70 years or older. Radiation exposure from mammography is low. Patient adverse experiences are common and transient and do not affect screening practices. Estimates of overdiagnosis vary from 1% to 10%. Younger women have more false-positive mammography results and additional imaging but fewer biopsies than older women. Trials of clinical breast examination are ongoing; trials for breast self-examination showed no reductions in mortality but increases in benign biopsy results. LIMITATION: Studies of older women, digital mammography, and magnetic resonance imaging are lacking.

conclusionMammography screening reduces breast cancer mortality for women aged 39 to 69 years; data are insufficient for older women. False-positive mammography results and additional imaging are common. No benefit has been shown for clinical breast examination or breast self-examination.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAge FactorsAnxietyBreast NeoplasmsBreast Self-ExaminationEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHealth Care CostsHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMammographyMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPalpationRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID19920273
PMCPMC2972726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.