ArticleStatistical methods in medical research2010
Modelling the cumulative risk of a false-positive screening test.
Article in Statistical methods in medical research, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Benefits and harms of annual, biennial, or triennial breast cancer mammography screening for women at average risk of breast cancer: a systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC).British journal of cancer · 2022Pooled it
- Long-term psychosocial consequences of false-positive screening mammography: a cohort study with follow-up of 12-14 years in Denmark.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Nonhomogeneous Markov chain for estimating the cumulative risk of multiple false positive screening tests.Biometrics · 2022Article
- Cumulative Advanced Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Model Developed in a Screening Mammography Population.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2022Article
- Cumulative Probability of False-Positive Results After 10 Years of Screening With Digital Breast Tomosynthesis vs Digital Mammography.JAMA network open · 2022Observational
- Article
- Long-term risk of screen-detected and interval breast cancer after false-positive results at mammography screening: joint analysis of three national cohorts.British journal of cancer · 2019Article
- Towards personalized screening: Cumulative risk of breast cancer screening outcomes in women with and without a first-degree relative with a history of breast cancer.International journal of cancer · 2016Article
- Statistical Methods for Estimating the Cumulative Risk of Screening Mammography Outcomes.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2016Article
- Factors Associated With Rates of False-Positive and False-Negative Results From Digital Mammography Screening: An Analysis of Registry Data.Annals of internal medicine · 2016Article
- Radiation-Induced Breast Cancer Incidence and Mortality From Digital Mammography Screening: A Modeling Study.Annals of internal medicine · 2016Article
- Comparison of cumulative false-positive risk of screening mammography in the United States and Denmark.Cancer epidemiology · 2015Article
- Article
- Impact of mammography screening interval on breast cancer diagnosis by menopausal status and BMI.Journal of general internal medicine · 2013Article
- Outcomes of screening mammography by frequency, breast density, and postmenopausal hormone therapy.JAMA internal medicine · 2013Article
- Screening outcomes in older US women undergoing multiple mammograms in community practice: does interval, age, or comorbidity score affect tumor characteristics or false positive rates?Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2013Article
- A semiparametric censoring bias model for estimating the cumulative risk of a false-positive screening test under dependent censoring.Biometrics · 2013Article
- False-positive screening mammograms and biopsies among women participating in a Canadian provincial breast screening program.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2012Article
- Screening: part 19 of a series on evaluation of scientific publications.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2012Article
- Influence of false-positive mammography results on subsequent screening: do physician recommendations buffer negative effects?Journal of medical screening · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The goal of a screening test is to reduce morbidity and mortality through the early detection of disease; but the benefits of screening must be weighed against potential harms, such as false-positive (FP) results, which may lead to increased healthcare costs, patient anxiety, and other adverse outcomes associated with diagnostic follow-up procedures. Accurate estimation of the cumulative risk of an FP test after multiple screening rounds is important for program evaluation and goal setting, as well as informing individuals undergoing screening what they should expect from testing over time. Estimation of the cumulative FP risk is complicated by the existence of censoring and possible dependence of the censoring time on the event history. Current statistical methods for estimating the cumulative FP risk from censored data follow two distinct approaches, either conditioning on the number of screening tests observed or marginalizing over this random variable. We review these current methods, identify their limitations and possibly unrealistic assumptions, and propose simple extensions to address some of these limitations. We discuss areas where additional extensions may be useful. We illustrate methods for estimating the cumulative FP recall risk of screening mammography and investigate the appropriateness of modelling assumptions using 13 years of data collected by the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC). In the BCSC data we found evidence of violations of modelling assumptions of both classes of statistical methods. The estimated risk of an FP recall after 10 screening mammograms varied between 58% and 77% depending on the approach used, with an estimate of 63% based on what we feel are the most reasonable modelling assumptions.
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.