ReviewAnnals of internal medicine2013
Influence of study features and methods on overdiagnosis estimates in breast and prostate cancer screening.
Review in Annals of internal medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 67 papers, 5 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
67 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 131 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence of incidental breast cancer and precursor lesions in autopsy studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cancer · 2017Pooled it
- Benefits and Harms of Screening Mammography by Comorbidity and Age: A Qualitative Synthesis of Observational Studies and Decision Analyses.Journal of general internal medicine · 2016Pooled it
- Guideline
- Quantifying and monitoring overdiagnosis in cancer screening: a systematic review of methods.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2015Pooled it
- Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA)-Based Population Screening for Prostate Cancer: An Evidence-Based Analysis.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2015Pooled it
- The effect of information on prostate cancer screening decision process: a discrete choice experiment.BMC health services research · 2020Trial
- Recent incidence and surgery trends for prostate cancer: Towards an attenuation of overdiagnosis and overtreatment?PloS one · 2019Trial
- A randomized trial of early detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (ProScreen): study design and rationale.European journal of epidemiology · 2017Trial
- Incidence and mortality trends after introduction of lung cancer screening in a community-based healthcare system.Cancer epidemiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Estimating lead time and overdiagnosis in cancer screening programmes: the MOCCI method.International journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Breast cancer screening in women aged 75 and older: Insights from an aging region in Japan.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- Lifetime Health and Economic Outcomes of Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging as First-Line Screening for Prostate Cancer : A Decision Model Analysis.Annals of internal medicine · 2024Article
- ASSESSING SCREENING EFFICACY IN THE PRESENCE OF CANCER OVERDIAGNOSIS.The annals of applied statistics · 2024Article
- Shopping for New Cancer Screening Tests.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023Article
- Cumulative 6-Year Risk of Screen-Detected Ductal Carcinoma In Situ by Screening Frequency.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Harm-to-Benefit of Three Decades of Prostate Cancer Screening in Black Men.NEJM evidence · 2022Article
- The modified prostate health index (PHI) outperforms PHI density in the detection of clinical prostate cancer within the PSA grey zone.International urology and nephrology · 2022Article
- Estimation of Breast Cancer Overdiagnosis in a U.S. Breast Screening Cohort.Annals of internal medicine · 2022Article
- Overdiagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: Prevented by guidelines?Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.) · 2022Review
7 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Knowledge of the likelihood that a screening-detected case of cancer has been overdiagnosed is vitally important to make treatment decisions and develop screening policy. An overdiagnosed case is an excess case detected by screening. Estimates of the frequency of overdiagnosis in breast and prostate cancer screening vary greatly across studies. This article identifies features of overdiagnosis studies that influence results and shows their effect by using published research. First, different ways to define and measure overdiagnosis are considered. Second, contextual features and how they affect overdiagnosis estimates are examined. Third, the effect of estimation approach is discussed. Many studies use excess incidence under screening as a proxy for overdiagnosis. Others use statistical models to make inferences about lead time or natural history and then derive the corresponding fraction of cases that are overdiagnosed. This article concludes with questions that readers of overdiagnosis studies can use to evaluate the validity and relevance of published estimates and recommends that authors of studies quantifying overdiagnosis provide information about these features.
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.