ArticleMedical care2011
Accuracy of diagnostic mammography at facilities serving vulnerable women.
Article in Medical care, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinic type and patient characteristics affecting time to resolution after an abnormal cancer-screening exam.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2015Trial
- Patient, facility, and community determinants of timely follow up after abnormal screening mammograms in Appalachia: A multilevel analysis.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2026Article
- Identifying key barriers to effective breast cancer control in rural settings.Preventive medicine · 2021Article
- Factors Associated with False Positive Results on Screening Mammography in a Population of Predominantly Hispanic Women.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2018Article
- The Challenges of Screening Mammography in Racial/Ethnic Minority Populations in the United States: A mini-review and observations from a predominantly Hispanic community.Journal of cancer treatment & diagnosis · 2018Article
- Availability of Advanced Breast Imaging at Screening Facilities Serving Vulnerable Populations.Journal of medical screening · 2016Article
- Racial differences in false-positive mammogram rates: results from the ACRIN Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST).Medical care · 2015Article
- Do mammographic technologists affect radiologists' diagnostic mammography interpretative performance?AJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2015Article
- Article
- Timeliness of abnormal screening and diagnostic mammography follow-up at facilities serving vulnerable women.Medical care · 2013Article
- Facility characteristics do not explain higher false-positive rates in diagnostic mammography at facilities serving vulnerable women.Medical care · 2012Article
- Mammographic interpretive volume and diagnostic mammogram interpretation performance in community practice.Radiology · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBreast cancer missed on diagnostic mammography may contribute to delayed diagnoses, whereas false-positive results may lead to unnecessary invasive procedures. Whether accuracy of diagnostic mammography at facilities serving vulnerable women differs from other facilities is unknown.
objectiveTo compare the interpretive performance of diagnostic mammography at facilities serving vulnerable women to those serving nonvulnerable women.
designWe examined 168,251 diagnostic mammograms performed at Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium facilities from 1999 to 2005. We used hierarchical logistic regression to compare sensitivity, false positive rates, and cancer detection rates. SUBJECTS: Women aged between 40 and 80 years underwent diagnostic mammography to evaluate an abnormal screening mammogram or breast problem. MEASURES: Facilities were assigned vulnerability indices according to the populations served based on the proportion of mammograms performed on women with lower educational attainment, racial/ethnic minority status, limited household income, or rural residences.
resultsSensitivity of diagnostic mammography did not vary significantly across vulnerability indices adjusted for patient-level characteristics, but false-positive rates for diagnostic mammography examinations to evaluate a breast problem were higher at facilities serving vulnerable women defined as those with lower educational attainment (odds ratio [OR], 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08, 1.79); racial/ethnic minorities (OR, 1.32; 95% CI: 0.98, 1.76); limited income (OR, 1.34; 95% CI: 1.08, 1.66); and rural residence (OR, 1.55; 95% CI: 1.27, 1.88).
conclusionsDiagnostic mammography to evaluate a breast problem at facilities serving vulnerable women had higher false positive rates than at facilities serving nonvulnerable women. This may reflect concerns that vulnerable populations may be less likely to follow-up after abnormal diagnostic mammography or concerns that such populations have higher cancer prevalence.
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.