ArticleJournal of medical screening2012
Influence of false-positive mammography results on subsequent screening: do physician recommendations buffer negative effects?
Article in Journal of medical screening, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association Between False-Positive Results and Return to Screening Mammography in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium Cohort.Annals of internal medicine · 2024Article
- Patients' experiences undergoing breast evaluation in Rwanda's Women's Cancer Early Detection Program.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2023Article
- Identifying Equitable Screening Mammography Strategies for Black Women in the United States Using Simulation Modeling.Annals of internal medicine · 2021Article
- Subsequent attendance in a breast cancer screening program after a false-positive result in the Local Health Authority of Bologna (Italy).Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Engaging Women with Limited Health Literacy in Mammography Decision-Making: Perspectives of Patients and Primary Care Providers.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Article
- Discussions of Potential Mammography Benefits and Harms among Patients with Limited Health Literacy and Providers: "Oh, There are Harms?"Journal of health communication · 2020Article
- Cost- Effectiveness of Mammography Screening Program in a Resource-Limited Post-Soviet Country of Kazakhstan.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2019Article
- Primary care visit use after positive fecal immunochemical test for colorectal cancer screening.Cancer · 2017Article
- Psychological Outcomes After a False Positive Mammogram: Preliminary Evidence for Ethnic Differences Across Time.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2017Article
- Impact of a False-Positive Screening Mammogram on Subsequent Screening Behavior and Stage at Breast Cancer Diagnosis.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2017Article
- The WISDOM Study: breaking the deadlock in the breast cancer screening debate.NPJ breast cancer · 2017Review
- Article
- Perspectives on mammography after receipt of secondary screening owing to a false positive.Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's HealthArticle
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveCancer screening guidelines often include discussion about the unintended negative consequences of routine screening. This prospective study examined effects of false-positive mammography results on women's adherence to subsequent breast cancer screening and psychological well-being. We also assessed whether barriers to screening exacerbated the effects of false-positive results.
methodsWe conducted secondary analyses of data from telephone interviews and medical claims records for 2406 insured women. The primary outcome was adherence to screening guidelines, defined as adherent (10-14 months), delayed (15-34 months), or no subsequent mammogram on record.
resultsAbout 8% of women reported that their most recent screening mammograms produced false-positive results. In the absence of self-reported advice from their physicians to be screened, women were more likely to have no subsequent mammograms on record if they received false-positive results than if they received normal results (18% vs. 7%, OR = 3.17, 95% CI = 1.30, 7.70). Receipt of false-positive results was not associated with this outcome for women who said their physicians had advised regular screening in the past year (7% vs. 10%, OR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.38, 1.45). False-positive results were associated with greater breast cancer worry (P < .01), thinking more about the benefits of screening (P < .001), and belief that abnormal test results do not mean women have cancer (P < .01), regardless of physicians' screening recommendations.
conclusionFalse-positive mammography results, coupled with reports that women's physicians did not advise regular screening, could lead to non-adherence to future screening. Abnormal mammograms that do not result in cancer diagnoses are opportunities for physicians to stress the importance of regular screening.
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.