ArticleMedical care2013
Timeliness of abnormal screening and diagnostic mammography follow-up at facilities serving vulnerable women.
Article in Medical care, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Defining and Measuring Adherence in Observational Studies Assessing Outcomes of Real-world Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.European urology oncology · 2021Pooled it
- 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
- Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Use, Facility Mammography Volume, and Timely Follow-Up After Abnormal Screening Mammograms in Appalachia, United States.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2026Article
- Connecting algorithmic fairness and fair outcomes in a sociotechnical simulation case study of AI-assisted healthcare.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Management Pathways for Workup of Abnormal Screening With Digital Mammography Versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR · 2025Article
- Screening mammographic performance by race and age in the National Mammography Database: 29,479,665 screening mammograms from 13,181,241 women.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2024Article
- Sources of Disparities in Surveillance Mammography Performance and Risk-Guided Recommendations for Supplemental Breast Imaging: A Simulation Study.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2023Article
- The Current State of Timeliness in the Breast Cancer Diagnosis Journey: Abnormal Screening to Biopsy.Seminars in ultrasound, CT, and MR · 2023Review
- Addressing Disparities Related to Access of Multimodality Breast Imaging Services Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Academic radiology · 2022Review
- Identifying key barriers to effective breast cancer control in rural settings.Preventive medicine · 2021Article
- Multilevel predictors of guideline concordant needle biopsy use for non-metastatic breast cancer.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2021Article
- Breast Cancer Health Disparities in Hispanics/Latinas.Current breast cancer reports · 2020Article
- Assessing patient navigation as a tool to address equity in cancer early detection.Translational cancer research · 2019Article
- Mammography facilities serving vulnerable women have longer follow-up times.Health services research · 2019Article
- Effects of program scale-up on time to resolution for patients with abnormal screening mammography results.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2018Article
- Cancer care coordination: opportunities for healthcare delivery research.Translational behavioral medicine · 2018Article
- Addressing Potential Health Disparities in the Adoption of Advanced Breast Imaging Technologies.Academic radiology · 2018Review
- Hispanic Breast Cancer Patients Travel Further for Equitable Surgical Care at a Comprehensive Cancer Center.Health equity · 2018Article
- Time to Clinical Follow-up after Abnormal Mammogram among African American and Hispanic Women.Journal of health care for the poor and underserved · 2018Article
- Implementation science for ambulatory care safety: a novel method to develop context-sensitive interventions to reduce quality gaps in monitoring high-risk patients.Implementation science : IS · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhether timeliness of follow-up after abnormal mammography differs at facilities serving vulnerable populations, such as women with limited education or income, in rural areas, and racial/ethnic minorities is unknown.
methodsWe examined receipt of diagnostic evaluation after abnormal mammography using 1998-2006 Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium-linked Medicare claims. We compared whether time to recommended breast imaging or biopsy depended on whether women attended facilities serving vulnerable populations. We characterized a facility by the proportion of mammograms performed on women with limited education or income, in rural areas, or racial/ethnic minorities.
resultsWe analyzed 30,874 abnormal screening examinations recommended for follow-up imaging across 142 facilities and 10,049 abnormal diagnostic examinations recommended for biopsy across 114 facilities. Women at facilities serving populations with less education or more racial/ethnic minorities had lower rates of follow-up imaging (4%-5% difference, P<0.05), and women at facilities serving more rural and low-income populations had lower rates of biopsy (4%-5% difference, P<0.05). Women undergoing biopsy at facilities serving vulnerable populations had longer times until biopsy than those at facilities serving nonvulnerable populations (21.6 vs. 15.6 d; 95% confidence interval for mean difference 4.1-7.7). The proportion of women receiving recommended imaging within 11 months and biopsy within 3 months varied across facilities (interquartile range, 85.5%-96.5% for imaging and 79.4%-87.3% for biopsy).
conclusionsAmong Medicare recipients, follow-up rates were slightly lower at facilities serving vulnerable populations, and among those women who returned for diagnostic evaluation, time to follow-up was slightly longer at facilities that served vulnerable population. Interventions should target variability in follow-up rates across facilities, and evaluate effectiveness particularly at facilities serving vulnerable populations.
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.