ReviewEpidemiologic reviews2011
Interpreting overdiagnosis estimates in population-based mammography screening.
Review in Epidemiologic reviews, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 2 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
60 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Guideline
- Quantifying and monitoring overdiagnosis in cancer screening: a systematic review of methods.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2015Pooled it
- Is mammography screening beneficial: An individual-based stochastic model for breast cancer incidence and mortality.PLoS computational biology · 2020Trial
- Mammographic screening detects low-risk tumor biology breast cancers.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2014Trial
- Modelling the overdiagnosis of breast cancer due to mammography screening in women aged 40 to 49 in the United Kingdom.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2012Trial
- Underdiagnosis of Health: A Key Driver of Overdiagnosis of Disease.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
- A Systematic Review of the Cost-Effectiveness of Screening Modalities for Breast Cancer in European Countries.Cancers · 2025Review
- Thirty years of population-based breast cancer screening in Iceland: a comparison of quality indicators and tumour characteristics between women aged 40-49 and 50-69 years.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2025Article
- The Screening Tomosynthesis Trial with Advanced Reader Methods (STREAM): design and rationale of a population-based breast cancer screening trial.European radiology · 2025Article
- Breast cancer screening motivation and behaviours of women aged over 75 years: a scoping review.BMC women's health · 2024Article
- Another piece in the overdiagnosis jigsaw puzzle.BMJ oncology · 2023Article
- Effectiveness of Organized Mammography Screening for Different Breast Cancer Molecular Subtypes.Cancers · 2022Article
- Mammography and Decision Aid Use for Breast Cancer Screening in Older Women.American journal of preventive medicine · 2022Article
- Evolution and Reproducibility of Simulation Modeling in Epidemiology and Health Policy Over Half a Century.Epidemiologic reviews · 2022Review
- Extending Age Ranges in Breast Cancer Screening in Four European Countries: Model Estimations of Harm-to-Benefit Ratios.Cancers · 2021Article
- Overdiagnosis: one concept, three perspectives, and a model.European journal of epidemiology · 2021Article
- MicroRNA profiling in serum: Potential signatures for breast cancer diagnosis.Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers · 2021Article
- Breast cancer mortality and overdiagnosis after implementation of population-based screening in Denmark.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2020Article
- Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Biology, Language, and Active Surveillance: A Survey of Breast Radiologists' Knowledge and Opinions.Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR · 2020Article
- Modeling the natural history of ductal carcinoma in situ based on population data.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2020Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Estimates of overdiagnosis in mammography screening range from 1% to 54%. This review explains such variations using gradual implementation of mammography screening in the Netherlands as an example. Breast cancer incidence without screening was predicted with a micro-simulation model. Observed breast cancer incidence (including ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer) was modeled and compared with predicted incidence without screening during various phases of screening program implementation. Overdiagnosis was calculated as the difference between the modeled number of breast cancers with and the predicted number of breast cancers without screening. Estimating overdiagnosis annually between 1990 and 2006 illustrated the importance of the time at which overdiagnosis is measured. Overdiagnosis was also calculated using several estimators identified from the literature. The estimated overdiagnosis rate peaked during the implementation phase of screening, at 11.4% of all predicted cancers in women aged 0-100 years in the absence of screening. At steady-state screening, in 2006, this estimate had decreased to 2.8%. When different estimators were used, the overdiagnosis rate in 2006 ranged from 3.6% (screening age or older) to 9.7% (screening age only). The authors concluded that the estimated overdiagnosis rate in 2006 could vary by a factor of 3.5 when different denominators were used. Calculations based on earlier screening program phases may overestimate overdiagnosis by a factor 4. Sufficient follow-up and agreement regarding the chosen estimator are needed to obtain reliable estimates.
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.