SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2013
Screening for breast cancer with mammography.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 361 papers, 16 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
361 citing papers in PubMed, 16 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 1,870 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cancer screening uptake among refugees in high and middle-income countries: a systematic review.Preventive medicine · 2026Pooled it
- The screening value of mammography for breast cancer: an overview of 28 systematic reviews with evidence mapping.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- [Cancer prevention recommendations: Update 2024].Atencion primaria · 2024Guideline
- MiRNAs as potential biomarkers in early breast cancer detection: a systematic review.Journal of medicine and life · 2024Pooled it
- Deaths and cardiopulmonary events following colorectal cancer screening-A systematic review with meta-analyses.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Mammography in combination with breast ultrasonography versus mammography for breast cancer screening in women at average risk.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Supplemental Screening as an Adjunct to Mammography for Breast Cancer Screening in People With Dense Breasts: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2023Pooled it
- Effects of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for breast cancer in health care quality improvements. A second systematic review.F1000Research · 2022Pooled it
- Treatment effects in randomised trials using routinely collected data for outcome assessment versus traditional trials: meta-research study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2021Pooled it
- Accuracy and Effectiveness of Mammography versus Mammography and Tomosynthesis for Population-Based Breast Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Scientific reports · 2020Pooled it
- "Clicks, likes, shares and comments" a systematic review of breast cancer screening discourse in social media.PloS one · 2020Pooled it
- All-cause mortality versus cancer-specific mortality as outcome in cancer screening trials: A review and modeling study.Cancer medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Systematic reviews as a 'lens of evidence': Determinants of benefits and harms of breast cancer screening.International journal of cancer · 2019Pooled it
- How do women experience a false-positive test result from breast screening? A systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies.British journal of cancer · 2019Pooled it
- Screening for reducing morbidity and mortality in malignant melanoma.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Effect of an information leaflet on breast cancer screening participation: A cluster randomized controlled trial.BMC public health · 2021Trial
- Cost-effectiveness of mammography-based breast cancer screening in Jordan: a healthcare system perspective.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Article
- Psychological Responses to Breast Density Notification: Empowerment or Anxiety?Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- The promise of artificial intelligence in diagnostic breast pathology.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Article
301 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Update of
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA variety of estimates of the benefits and harms of mammographic screening for breast cancer have been published and national policies vary.
objectivesTo assess the effect of screening for breast cancer with mammography on mortality and morbidity. SEARCH
methodsWe searched PubMed (22 November 2012) and the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (22 November 2012). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing mammographic screening with no mammographic screening. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. MAIN
resultsEight eligible trials were identified. We excluded a trial because the randomisation had failed to produce comparable groups.The eligible trials included 600,000 women in the analyses in the age range 39 to 74 years. Three trials with adequate randomisation did not show a statistically significant reduction in breast cancer mortality at 13 years (relative risk (RR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 1.02); four trials with suboptimal randomisation showed a significant reduction in breast cancer mortality with an RR of 0.75 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.83). The RR for all seven trials combined was 0.81 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.87). We found that breast cancer mortality was an unreliable outcome that was biased in favour of screening, mainly because of differential misclassification of cause of death. The trials with adequate randomisation did not find an effect of screening on total cancer mortality, including breast cancer, after 10 years (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.10) or on all-cause mortality after 13 years (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.03).Total numbers of lumpectomies and mastectomies were significantly larger in the screened groups (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.42), as were number of mastectomies (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.32). The use of radiotherapy was similarly increased whereas there was no difference in the use of chemotherapy (data available in only two trials). AUTHORS'
conclusionsIf we assume that screening reduces breast cancer mortality by 15% and that overdiagnosis and overtreatment is at 30%, it means that for every 2000 women invited for screening throughout 10 years, one will avoid dying of breast cancer and 10 healthy women, who would not have been diagnosed if there had not been screening, will be treated unnecessarily. Furthermore, more than 200 women will experience important psychological distress including anxiety and uncertainty for years because of false positive findings. To help ensure that the women are fully informed before they decide whether or not to attend screening, we have written an evidence-based leaflet for lay people that is available in several languages on www.cochrane.dk. Because of substantial advances in treatment and greater breast cancer awareness since the trials were carried out, it is likely that the absolute effect of screening today is smaller than in the trials. Recent observational studies show more overdiagnosis than in the trials and very little or no reduction in the incidence of advanced cancers with 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.